Given the cirumstances of the vote count, I believe any fair-minded person would want to be sure that the totals are accurate so we are sure that the person who got the most votes wins. If Mr. Prosser were on the other end of the sitation, I guarantee his people would have asked for a recount as well. Why else have a provision in the state law to automatically provide for one when the totals are so close? I would think that the Prosser supporters would feel confident that their man won and have nothing to fear in a recount. The Kloppenburg supporters will feel a lot better about the results if the current totals are confirmed by a recount, and don't we want solidarity behind the justice who legitimately wins? I say let the counting begin and may the person who got the most votes be our next Justice.

She sounded like a dits when she gave her win speech. Now she just proved it. Talk about wasting OUR money. She should have to pay all costs that this stupid re-count is going to cost us as tax payers. Wish she would run over the border like the rest of her clan.

I would have thought that all 'Sconies would welcome a validation of the integrity of the electoral process. I guess not.

Didn't the vote canvassing over the past week or so already serve to validate the integrity of the electoral process?

@ Jim.. I will tell you this. First, the first process is the canvassing process. Every county in the state has already double checked and in the case of Waukesha County triple checked. That is the whole idea of the canvass. You must remember that any numbers that come out are UNOFFICIAL until they have gone through the canvass and then certified by the GAB. This process was followed. that is how the mistake (by an incompetent fool) was discovered. They were double checked and found to be MISSING. And it is important to realize that these votes had been counted and not reported, they WERE NOT FOUND VOTES!!! I believe that the Brookfield Patch even had the numbers. So the AP was left out...big deal they have no official stance or say so on this issue.

Seriously?
Reading the media estimates and before the canvas - leading by a meager 200 votes in a 1.5MM vote election - she declares victory. Now after the canvas and the publication of official results indicate she lost by over 7,000 votes, she hits the taxpayers with a $500,000 bill for a recount?
What a buffoon.
Thank goodness we won't be "judged" by someone with such poor judgement.

John do you know Mark personally to make such an assumpation?

John, 7316 votes is an insurmountable number to overcome. It will cost the TAXPAYERS millions of dollars when we are already cash strapped in Wisconsin. Even in Kloppy's presser she basically admitted she didn't win and couldn't win. She stated it was about "election integrity" OK fine. I am all for it...now the democRATS can get on board with the Republicans and pass comprehensive voter id...mo mare same day registration, no more "vouching for", no more 10 residency, no more voting without an id. After all it is a 82% statewide issue. We could finally have a huge bi-partisan success.

Prosser was the one who announced his Recount Team seemingly within minutes of the polls closing and before the Brookfield Blunder was announced. She is entitled to the recount. So let the counting begin and the sniping end!

Anne, you are correct, Justice Prosser did call for a recall almost immediately. BUT THAT WAS WHEN KLOPPY THOUGHT SHE WON BY 224 VOTES!!! Not 7,316 votes!!!LMAO!! Did you see the press conference? When asked if she felt that she won...nothing...21 seconds of complete stupidity and silence!!! Too funny!!

The point has been made that she was quick to declare victory with only a 204 vote lead, but now with over a 7,000 deficit she wants a recount. Us Prosser supporters would have been skeptical if the shoe was on the other foot. But after the canvass and the GAB granting an OK on the results, rational thinking kicks in. But then again I haven't witnessed any rational thinking from liberal Democrats in a long, long time.

Have been trying to find the silver lining in getting stuck with a $500,000 bill by Ms. Kloppenberg for a recount...maybe we've found one on an issue to which both sides can agree and start moving forward.

It appears that the arguements the Kloppenberg camp is using to justify the recount at taxpayers expense are many of the same arguements for voter id...I guess that is the silver lining - both groups are now promoting arguements supporting voter id. Finally something they both agree on.

Let's see if it carries over to the capital building when it is time for a vote on the issue and let's start moving forward.

You people keep harping about the cost. Maybe if your governor hadn't given away 117 million in tax breaks to the corps. this wouldn't have been such a big deal ? Maybe you need to vote out Kathy Nickolaus, because there seems to be questions with every election she is involved in ? And she has already stated that she wouldn't resign. I really think she had better seek a plea bargain deal before the truth comes out.

Dennis, do you live in Wisconsin? If so Governor Walker is your Governor as well. Just because you don't like him doesn't change that. I don't like Obummer but he is still the President of the United States. As far as the cost goes, I am perfectly fine with that, because that will just be more cuts coming to the state employee. The more the better. And last...Kathy N. did NOT do anything illegal, what she did WAS COMPLETELY IGNORANT! If the fine residents of Waukesha do not approve of her, she has an election coming up. Due process will work its magic.

Why not just use your paid canvasers ? Or let the group from Utah do it for you. You Rethugs seem to favor that to a grass roots movement.

Geeeez, does anyone else think Dennis needs an enema or something? Sorry Dennis, you make it too easy to exploit your anger. You should be more honest, you might not get such criticism.

I just hope her champaign and these unions will pay for this. Brendan Conway of WISN just stated it will cost the Milwaukee County $500k alone. They want a recount, fine! They should pay for it, not the tax payers.

@Mark . . . contact your state legislator and have the law changed.

@Chris . . . see above. It's state law. Just remember, next time it could be one of your favored candidates losing a close election.

Randy if my favored candidate lost by over 7k votes I wouldn't expect them to ask for a recount. Until this recount the largest margin of one in the history of Wisconsin elections was just over 2k. This is a waste of tax payers time and money. Both the Racine Journal Times and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel have pointed this out. All this is going to do is piss more tax payers off after they see the entire REAL cost of this. The Kloppenburg campaign has set a new standard for utter stupidity . Look I really have no problem with the recount, but the tax payers shouldn't be asked to flip the bill for it.

you are absolutely right Karen

It will be once it is proven that Prosser has won the election and Kloppy fades away.

Jim, If it is your opinion that it is money well spent then perhaps you can write a check for the entire amount. It appears that the majority of the people who have weighed in thus far to this blog don't agree and clearly don't want to foot the bill. Why is it that accountability for tax payer money is not to be discussed, considered, or valued?? Let's continue to burden our future generations with greater debt and no change in the way we do business. Let's continue to watch weak politicians hide behind the "'lets not make any changes that impact any of my constituents" while I'm in office charade to further their own political careers.

From your lips to God's ears...And take that stupid red scarf with her...

Well said!

To you I say well done

Same way a clerk can say she forgot to hit 'save' in Microsoft access.

Randy, why is this even an issue anymore? It's been PROVEN that the votes from Brookfield are legitimate votes. The woman made a mistake, yes, and not her first one. HOWEVER, it did not change the outcome of the election. There was no fraud. There was no conspiracy. There was only a stupid mistake. The votes are legitimate. You and other Kloppy supporters continually bring it up and hint at it being a case of fraud or conspiracy. THE BROOKFIELD VOTES ARE LEGITIMATE VOTES, no matter WHEN they were counted. Simple mathematics...there were so many voters and so many votes. The numbers matched. Get rid of the clerk, yes, given her history of such mistakes. But stop with the insinuations about fraud and fake votes.

And here's maybe where she got it from: "I am hearing all sorts of reports on being given xeroxed ballots that would be transferred to a regular ballot later, " http://www.brookfieldnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/119305844.html

Or maybe other such sites. Not sure if it happened, but it ought to be checked out, don't you think?

Karen, please give Randy and the rest of them some time. They're still trying to formulate some kind of logical explanation for Kloppenburg's decision to go with the expensive statewide recount when the chance that it's going to change anything is nil. For now, this is the best they can do.

@Bob McBride - Yeah...it's getting REAL old. Talk about beating a dead horse....

Paul S., "a liberal wasting money." You've cited no examples, but let me share a few of Scott Walker's: $500,000 in back pay to county courthouse security workers he fired illegally, plus $95,000 month for an undetermined number of months for his privatized Wackenhut contract (estimating $750,000). At least $100,000 paid for the Blue Shirt project he canceled, I can't determine how much more was paid in penalties was paid for the canceled contract. Nearly $1m on the table that didn't need to be spent.

We'll see what "ringers" and "fake Demo ballots" emerge via the recount. However, the big questions all seem to come from Waukesha County, from a lady who squirrels data, puts words into other people's mouths, refuses to comply with information requests, is a known associate of Prosser, and has made a similar mistake in 2006 with the Van Hollen/Falk election, again resulting in a Republican victory. I'm not like Scott Walker, wasting people's money, but I do believe this election process and Nickolaus need to be investigated. It's the 21st Century! We should be able to count some votes without foolishness.

@ Bren

The audacity of Republicans to accuse Liberals of wasting money when it was their party, and twelve years of their policies, that brought this country to the brink of economic catastrophe with their borrow and spend, borrow and spend.

Even the CATO Institute documented that the Republicans and Bush outspent Democratic Clinton by far, but I didn't need a Libertarian/Republican think tank to tell me that. The surpluses Clinton created was wiped away in literal months by a money wasting Republican pResident and complicit Republican Congress.

So Bren, are you really suggesting that Waukesha county threw the election? The process of certification was overseen by Democrats and Republicans. I listened to the press conference, where both stated that the results were accurate. You don't just manufacture all the votes of the largest city in the county. This kind of talk is either ill-informed or irresponsible. I do not excuse the ineptness of Nickolaus, but ineptness does not equal the fraudulent manufacturing of thousands of votes - which, by the way, would put her in jail.

Amen, Gordon...not a gracious loser, no class, no decorum. No keeping taxpayer interest at heart. She's definitely someone I would not want sitting on the bench.

What on earth is ungracious about claiming something she in entitled to under law? Where is her lack of class or decorum? If Mr. Prosser were in her position, he surely would be doing the same thing and all of you who are criticizing Ms. Klopperburn for the same thing would be screaming FOR a recount! And for Ms. Nickolaus's head!

Oh, AMEN on THAT!!! 200 votes was good enough for her to declare herself a winner...but 7300 votes is too close to call....Here again...poor judgment on Kloppy's part....do you really want her sitting on the bench making important decisions?? I sure don't.

@Joe Resident

You're just p*ssed Kloppenburg didn't roll over and keep quiet for a Republican shill. What are you afraid of? Did you even read the article, or are you just wailing because a Democrat has the audacity to question a male Republican?

Explain how CONservative bloggers got news before SHE did about the unreported Brookfield votes?

>>> Kloppenburg also questioned how conservative bloggers had been leaked the bombshell news of the unreported Brookfield votes, hours before Nickolaus made her news public in a press conference. >>>

Explain how it's not illegal that the GAB had contact and communications with the Waukesha County clerk's office? And they're supposed to conduct a fair and equitable recount?? And you don't question that?

>>> Kloppenburg also challenged the ability of the state Government Accountability Board to conduct a fair investigation into Waukesha County. She said her campaign submitted documents to GAB Wednesday detailing "contact and communications" the state had with the Waukesha County clerk's office that she said "compromises" the state's ability to adequately investigate.

DareToBeFair, I would suggest that you change your nickname, since the very first line of your response indicates no desire to "be fair."

Don't like it? Change the LAW. She has this RIGHT, and were the tables turned, you bet Prosser would demand a recount, and you'd be right there cheering him on WITH teabags hangin' off your floppy hats!

Get real.

@DareToBe"Fair" - It may be the law and it may be her right. However, as quick as she was to declare herself a winner with a 200 vote span, she certainly did a turnabout when it turned to a 7300 vote span. As quickly as she declared herself a winner, she should have declared herself NOT a winner. If 200 votes can decide it, certainly 7300 votes should be able to decide it as well.

Yes, it's her right. However, IMHO, it shows extremely poor judgment and an extreme lack of common sense and an over-inflated sense of self-importance....and none of us should want those "qualities" in a Supreme Court Justice.

Furthermore, DareToBeFair, you should not assume that Prosser would demand a recount. Personally, I'm fairly confident that he would walk away if behind by 7,000 votes. No one has ever garnered even close to a quarter of the votes necessary to overcome such a lead. I think he would have demanded a recount for a 200 vote difference, but I consider it highly unlikely that he would have done so for 7,000 votes.

Karen, I think your point is very well said too.

>>> She needs to take her Little Orphan Annie hair-do AND her red scarf back into the obscurity from which she tried to climb. This definitely is NOT in the "best interest of the State of Wisconsin" or it's citizens.>>>

Neither is your misogynistic drivel.

I agree, can we please refrain from the personal attacks? Last I checked scarfs were a matter of personal taste, not political philosophy or public policy.

Very good advice

You were homeskooled, weren't you?

You need to understand...only Republicans are allowed to recounts. That's their philosophy.

I recall years ago a Milwaukee judge, I forget his name, who stood trial for molesting women--essentially, feeling them up in elevators and making crude remarks. The trial was televised (one of the first to be televised) and it was big news yet he won the election by 100 or so votes. He requested TWO recounts and lost both. He was a Republican.
Recounts happen and should when the margin is razor thin. If a clerk can forget to count 14,000 votes by human error (Nickolaus' story--which I happen to believe is a blatant lie), then you'd have to be kinda nutty not to ask for a recount with a .5 percent difference in the vote.

Casey.

It's not Kloppenburg's position to launch a recount for the purposes of restoring "confidence in this and future elections". Nobody put her in charge of determining whether or not there is enough of a lack of confidence to warrant such, or, even assuming there might be, to determine that a hand recount of THIS election even accomplishes such a task. In other words, that's a bunch of baloney. At this point, all she is is someone who lost an election she thought she had won by 200 votes who refuses to come to grips with the loss.

nancy, Christ Seraphim. He may have been a Republican, I'm not 100% sure. Regardless, as with this race it was non-partisan. He was viewed as a tough "law and order" judge at the time, which I suppose if you're on the other side of the fence automatically makes him a Republican.

Casey, I can only agree about the tone and manner of many of the comments here, and I'm shocked that folks like Nancy think that 14,000 votes are not the result of a human error (was it a Republican plot or fraud??? Do you really think so??? They manufactured the entire city of Brookfield's votes???).

I find it disturbing that so many can fail to evaluate with even some little amount of reasonable objectivity this situation. Our political discourse and civil conversation has been reduced to sheer rhetoric without content too often.

@ dare...it is simple...the Patch people were there in Brookfield when the results were in. Just like the Caledonia patch person (Denise Lockwood) was in Caledonia. It is open to candidates and press. So when 2 organizations got the numbers and the AP didn't....really big deal. The fact is that vote totals ARE NOT final until they are canvassed and verified by the GAB. That has now been done and verified by the GAB and Prosser Won by 7316 vote. No matter what happened in Brookfield the election has been certified! Oh and one more thing....Patch is NOT a conservative blog!!! Not even close!

Her WHOLE life? No.

She graduated with honors from the University of Wisconsin Law School
She has an undergraduate degree from Yale also with honors
Masters in Public Affairs from Princeton University
Teaches at the UW Law School since 1990
Peace Corps Volunteer in Botswana for 4 years
Member of the Legal Association for Women
Mentors with the Dane County Bar Association
English as a Second Language (ESL) tutor

What have YOU done lately? I am sorry but I am sick of people saying how inept, ridiculous or inexperienced she is. Her resume seems pretty impressive to me and I have to wonder what all of you have done with YOUR lives to be so critical of someone else's.

People can only comment on her inexperience if they personally have more experience than the person they are being critical of?

I think it is entirely fair and appropriate to compare her experience with that of Prosser and draw conclusions and make criticisms based on the comparison.

She sounds impressive except one thing...she also puts 80 something old farmers in jail! She is a hack at best!

Regardless of her credentials, she has now effectively forfeited her integrity by becoming a tool of the political left in what is, apparently, to be their strategy from here on in - attempt to negate the results of elections that don't go their way.

http://www.wisfarmer.com/editorial/118174874.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/apr/01/citizens-strong-america/ad-says-joanne-kloppenburg-jailed-80-year-old-farm/

Yeah, she brutally jailed this guy for no good reason?! What a horrible wretch!

Duane, maybe you need to research the complete story from an objective angle about the 80 year old farmer. Why was he put in jail? Who caused him to be put in jail ? Evidently , the answers will suprise you.

You're right. You don't get it.

It's someone who read Dress For Success in 1980 and since then has concentrated more on her job than on a wardrobe consultant. What possible relevance can it have?

One can ask for a recount on a ward by ward basis. I agree she should ask for, and deserves a recount, she should limit it to Waukesha County only; the Waukesha County clerk appears less to be than competent. Can you explain why we need a statewide recount?

No. If the "shoe were on the other foot" it wouldn't be the exact same decision. This is a waste of time, money and energy. But when the results are verified with Justice Prosser remaining the victor and having recieved the majority of votes it'll be entertaining to watch the liberals cry again and again and again and again...

Nonsense. Got a problem with Waukesha, scrutinize Waukesha. This isn't about Waukesha, it's a fishing expedition for "undervotes", being directed by a guy who found a bunch of "missing" ballots in the back seat of a car. It's gone from a verified mistake to an opportunity for mischief. Care of this great, qualified candidate for our Supreme Court that you so admire.

Jay Sykes : If you will go back and reread the article after the part about Kevin Kennedy and the goverment accountability board the article explains why the recount is for more then one county. As for having no experience as a Supreme Court Justice, who has any experience until they have served. As in any job calling for experience, how do you get the experience until you do the job ? Even your man had no experience until he was elected the first time.

@Dennis Allen... Correction, David Prosser was appointed to the bench by Tommy Thompson and then was elected two years later.

Hey Heather, kind of sucks that the Jim Doyle and his merry henchman in the state congress either vetoed or shot down all voter and election reform bills while they were in charge huh?

There is a point where rational thinking comes into play. It's too bad the Kloppies don't know what that is.

Thank you Lyle. But my point is still how does a person get experience on a job without doing the job ? Everyone has to start somewhere. Even Prosser.

Dennis, she was passed up twice, once by Doyle and once by Obummer. She was NOT qualified then and she is NOT qualified now. As far as experience....how about working in a muni court for awhile and work your way up. That is how it usually works, unless you are the owner or something. Everyone starts at the bottom. She assumed she could just start at the highest court in Wisconsin.

@Nate.... "red baiting", are you a member of Joe McCarthy's family?

I'd like to know about the red scarf also...any color scarf. I don't even think that was "dress for success" in 1980??
I can say without a doubt, that if Justice Prosser had lost by over 7,000 votes I would think a recount ridiculous. 20 votes yes, maybe even 1,0000 but not over SEVEN THOUSAND.
IMO it's a waste of time and money, but if that is what she wants, we can't stop her now can we.
Let the games begin....again.

Payton, there was a period when the ads for realtors (and I used to get quite a few in the mail) had every one of the women in that get-up, to the extent that I started calling them the 'scarf gals'. The blazers or dresses were navy blue, and the scarf contrasted. So what if it's red?

@Lyle.....no, just curious. I noticed her supporters hold up signs with a logo that is awfully close to the Wisconsin Socialist Party's as well.

@Terry... How can you be de-benched if you've never been benched. @Payton... I've noticed that a lot of older middle aged women are wearing scarves, my wife included. If I remember the women's dress for success in 1980, it was scarf tied in a bow. I am curious whether she has a scar or something she is covering. @Nate... Yah, we on the left can't get to far from our socialist roots.

Terry,
You have a vay mit verds. You use a lot of them to say nothing.

Well stated, Rick. Thanks!

Union members aren't taxpayers? Wow! If I thought my paycheck and real estate would be tax-free, I'd find myself a union to join PDQ. Local Brotherhood of Walmart Greeters sounds good.

You people contuine to ingore the FACT that union people pay taxes too. Do you think that because they belong to a union they pay less taxes then you ? You're talking about your neighbors, the man across the street, The couple that live 2 houses down. WTH is the matter with you people ? Good post Randy.

Private sector unions deal with the company (the employer). The tax paying public is the employer of the public unions and we cannot afford and cannot sustain the tax levels with the economic situation and the fiscal mess this state is in. Besides collective bargaining is NOT a right, but a privilege. And since unions almost never agree with anything that needs to be changed, it's time tthey were weakened since WI. has some of the strongest civil service protections in the country. Unions calling for boycotts against certain companies that will only hurt the working folks there was the last straw.

@Kieth Best... Your statement about the Wisconsin Civil Service as being one of the strongest in the country is totally incorrect. They are archaic and have not kept pace with changes in employment law and accepted business practice. The collective bargaining agreements were used to perform this function. If collective bargaining contracts will no longer be allowed, then the Civil Service Code and Statutes must be updated. Many think that the Federal Labor Relations, the EPA and EEOC statutes cover all related conditions covered under collective bargaining agreements ; but they are also equally misinformed.

A judge is supposed to take some time to think about a decision -- hours or even days on a complex constitutional issue. That was a rather loaded question.

Doyle or Obama calling anyone unqualified is calling the kettle black.

Rick, I'm a taxpayer, an independent voter, and not a union member. I, and thousands of other non-union, independent taxpayers voted for Kloppenburg because of statements made that Prosser intended to be a "complement" to Scott Walker's policies. This fits precisely into your point that "judges should never make law." Ex.: Chief Justice Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court took a state legal matter the Court was reviewing from the state of Michigan and turned it into a national concern. This was activist. Because there were more conservative, activist judges on the SC, this was actually forced through, over the protests of the other non-activist judges (SCJ's are lifetime appointments because they are supposed to be for law, not party politics). Because of Roberts' activism, decades of campaign reform legislation were rolled back and corporate dollars are back to influencing elections. So when I hear that a judicial candidate intends to "complement" political ideology, it makes me believe that the judicial branch would be at risk of losing its objectivity and that is unconstitutional. As an American citizen, I have to do what I can to preserve the integrity of our government.

@Rick, it was all I had time for, and your nuances spoke loud and clear.

I'm a taxpayer -- never been a union member -- and frankly, the school tax levy on my property tax bill is bleeding me dry. But let's get real. What does the Budget Repair Bill really do? It keeps on collecting the same amount of money from state taxpayers, takes what used to return to the local governments and gives it to business, and then sticks it to the local public employees so that we the taxpayers won't notice this new tax shift on our property tax bills.

" The unions, and mostly unions for state and municipal employees, tossed everything they had into this election as a way of denying the voters of Wisconsin from having their 2010 elected officials conduct the states business."

All well and good IF Walker had campaigned on the issue of ending collective bargaining. He did not.

You needn't give me a lesson in civics. The Wisconsin Supreme Court will be ruling on the legality of the way the collective bargaining provision of the bill was passed as it applies to our Open Meetings law. It's a very fine legal point. That is not 'making law'. It is a ruling on whether or not a law was passed legally.

Randy1949, regarding your last paragraph, the only reason all these questionable tactics came to be an issue at all, you should recall, is because the democrats left the state instead of completing their legal obligations.

@M C Yes, they turned something that should have happened quietly and with no fanfare into a big incident. People found out. People objected.

I wish it were a legal obligation for candidates running for office to be honest about what they actually plan to do.

"People found out. People objected."
You act like this was some kind of process cloaked in secrecy. These were public proceedings, and people could and did object at any time they wanted. But you brought up legality, and now you disregard it when it is not in your interest to maintain it?

Were the democrats obliged or not, legally speaking, to stay in Madison and fulfill the obligations of their office?

As to being honest about plans, if someone had a crystal ball in October that said that the Republicans were going to completely upset the balance of power in Madison in the November elections, and then carry out legislation on X, Y, and Z, then I guess they should have come forward with that information. On the other hand, if the Republicans were voted into office by the majority with the hope that they would bring with them change in how state budgetary policy, etc., was done, then they saw a move in that direction.

You can't be honest about an unknown future; you can only represent who you are and what your outlook is. I don't think Walker, et al, were dishonest in that regard.

@MC... In regards to your above statements... I maintain the voters in the state were not informed of Candidate Walker's full plan for getting government spending under control. People are not mind readers. Not everyone is convinced that unknown change is necessarily a good thing. I maintain that if the electorate was fully cognizant of Walker's plans that he would not have been elected. As the events of the next year unfolds, we will all see the consequences of Walker's policies. If they work out the way I think they will, we may have a recall election for Governor for the first time in state history.

Thank you, Lyle. "Hello, I'm Scott Walker. Elect me, and I will balance our budget without raising your taxes and bring jobs to our state." What's not to like?

I knew Scott Walker was an extreme conservative, and I had read much of the criticism of his time as County Executive, so I voted for Barrett. When Walker won, I thought, well we've have Republican Governors before -- how bad can it be? He showed us, didn't he?

I don't think his victory margin was that big. I doubt he'd have won if he'd run on a platform of busting the unions and giving tax breaks to business at the expense of social programs and the schools.

Lyle, to be frank, I would be loathe were we to have a recall of the governor or others over this issue. In my opinion it is a misuse of the recall. I don't believe we should use recalls over political issues, but only over gross misuse of office. Some argue that this makes recalls of the Dems who left the state justified. I'm uneasy about that. And I'm opposed to recalling anyone from either side of the aisle over disagreements, however strong, regarding their political agendas. That is what elections are for. Give them their allotted time to carry out their efforts. There will be another election soon enough. We don't even know yet how successful these policies will be. Recalls on either side only further divide an already divided public and make productive conversation and policy debates less and less possible.

Randy, "how bad can it be" is a very subjective question. Certainly the way you frame the question and your answer, "giving tax breaks to business at the expense of social programs and the schools," vilifies the governor and shows how you view the matter. Obviously others view it differently.

@Randy1949...I am a resident of Milwaukee County and I knew fully well how reactionary Walker is and his questionable history. Many people probably don't remember when he and Paul Ryan appeared on Mark Belling's Sunday morning TV program. He and Ryan's political philosophy were blatently apparant at the time. They both advocate as extreme right wing philosophy and are clearly Ayn Rand Libertarians. Also, Walker is an extreme social conservative and I see him making a move on embyro stem cell research. His wife has already come out in support of adult stem cell research. I think most forget he has been on the public payroll for over 15 years. He is a professional politician. He has no other profession, unlike Jim Doyle, Tommy Thompson, Tom Barrett and Rus Feingold who are all attorneys. Mordicai Lee stated before the election that Scott Walker is one of the best politicians he has ever known. As the Kennedy Family were taught, "Public Service is the highest calling". I fear a Scott Walker because he is an ideologue and is not prone to comprimise. With him it is all or nothing at all. His stand on collective bargaining is a prime example. I am sure he has designs on national office.

@MC... I do not take recalls lightly. However, they are elections and they have a place. Our governor may be placed in the position for recall, not because of his political philosophy, but because of his actions. To subject the electorate to what I consider a "bait and switch", is an indication of an ethical construct that does not agree with most midwesterner's idea of appropriate conduct. Our ethos normally responds to the concept of trusting a person's word. Playing in the shadows of legitamacy and walking the razor's edge of authenticity is something that most don't tolerate very well. If you view his actions in the right light, he has made an unprecedented power grab for an executive. He makes Tommy Thompson look like a light weight and Thompson has always been percieved as a super strong executive. Just be warned, tyrannies begin with simple steps. Recalls are a safety net for electorate for incompetence and dishonesty.

Lyle, I don't know that the "snapshot", Wisconsin's Supreme Court race, is anything but a blurry photograph. There is lots of red and blue, but not much purple. It does not show the November flip from all Democratic to all Republican control was fluke; if it was a Prosser=Walker referendum.

Lyle, I too am concerned that this not be framed an issue of unions versus taxpayers, but for different reasons. This election was supposed to be about the election of a judge to the supreme court, but instead the election was made into something entirely different, a referendum on other political issues. This is a judge position for 10 years, and as such the discussion should have centered on who would serve that position best. By those standards, in my opinion, any reasonable person would not prefer Kloppenburg over Prosser.

I can appreciate that there are many of a liberal viewpoint who would be less than enthusiastic about Prosser (although we should all remember that he is a moderate, not some hyper-conservative reactionary). I can understand that they would prefer a different candidate. What is so disappointing is that the alternative would be Kloppenburg, who has no experience at all as a judge, or even as a lawyer addressing the breadth of issues that a supreme court justice might be expected to have experience with. She is an environmental lawyer, and a very ideological one at that. She simply is not qualified to serve as a supreme court justice.

But this election was not about who was qualified; it was made to be about all these other issues.

As to your other assertions, I would question them and what you conclude from them. But I'll not spend more time on that now.

@Jay Sykes & MC... This election for Supreme Court Justice took on additional meaning for the lefties since it was the first state wide election since Walker took over as governor. The race lost its focus when the third parties took over the message and the two candidates were left out. From my point of view, if Prosser won, which I strongly felt that he would; the mix on the High Court would not change. Prosser's positions and decisions have clearly put him on the right of issues. This is consistent with his history as both a prosecutor and a legislator. Of the two candidates he was the only one with a judicial record. On the other hand, Kloppenburg does not have a record as a judge, but is highly credentialed as an attorney working for the AG for the last 21 years and teaching law at the UW. But again, it was not about either one of them, it was all about Governor Walker and the "bomb he dropped" after taking office. I really don't think we can discern anything from this race except the state is deeply divided over the current administration and legislature. Now, the question before us, is why with such an overpowering lead, would Kloppenburg decide to ask for a recount. All of us are running on pure conjecture at this point. I don't have a clear view as to what is to be accomplished by the recount. I have to agree with my conservative friends that it is probably an unwarranted cost to verify something we already know. I for one will continue to watch and see what develops.

Kloppenburg is highly credentialed, but if you were to look at her record objectively, I don't think what would come to mind is, "this looks like a person who should be on the supreme court."

But Lyle, I appreciate your comment, and think it largely accurate. Thanks.

"Calling for a recount is not about fairness or integrity"
I meant to say, "calling for THIS recount"

MC, Prosser actually had his team in place for a recount. He didn't ask to be at the center of the firestorm I am sure. But the best way I know to start a firestorm is to set yourself up as a judge who will "complement" a political ideology. Corporate money is pouring into elections at every level because of a Supreme Court Justice who was "complementing" political ideology. A politicized judiciary does, at the very least, a tremendous disservice to our democratic form of government. At worst, it leads as Lyle eloquently points out, to a "single party system." E.g., Nazi Germany, U.S.S.R., "Communist" China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Libya, et al. No one in the full possession of their mind could want to destroy democracy! And I do believe greed is an addiction, as mind-warping and destructive as heroin, crack, or crystal meth.

He had his team in place for a recount when the vote difference was in the hundreds, not the thousands.

I'm not sure what I think about the "complement" idea. I'm not sure how much that quote is a politicized use of a quote, how representative it is of how Prosser has been on the bench, and I cringe at any comparison of this situation to the Nazis or communists. It is, in my view, a ridiculous comparison.

I do, however, agree with you that greed is an addiction, as is power, to which all our leaders are susceptible - on any side of any aisle. But we have a record for Prosser, and it does not indicate extremism. So why bring it up. He is a known quantity, and at 68 I don't think he is going to run down some new extreme avenue in the future. His opponent, on the other hand, leaves one with many more questions on how she would judge…

Speculating on what Prosser might have done still shifts attention away from what Kloppenburg has done in requesting a recount, which was the original point of this post.

Wow, what can I say? I think I'll just say it again: "I cringe at any comparison of this situation to the Nazis or communists. It is, in my view, a ridiculous comparison."

What makes you characterize Joanne Kloppenburg as an activist?

Google is your friend. He said something else here: http://www.livinglakecountry.com/oconomowocfocus/89913592.html

"Owner Tony Pipito confirmed the business's closing, saying that corruption at City Hall under Mayor Maury Sullivan's leadership is to blame."

And here: http://www.livinglakecountry.com/oconomowocfocus/news/97003479.html

And here: http://www.franklinnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/44150782.html I see the name Van Hollen rather than Kloppenburg.

And here: http://www.livinglakecountry.com/oconomowocfocus/news/49436042.html DNR Secretary in 2008 Was Matt Frank.

Finally, go here ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/20110403/pl_dailycaller/inwisconsinsupremecourtracekloppenburghasantibusinesshistory ) and scroll down to a comment by Wisborn:

"Fact: Pipito and his restaurant were NOT a party to the action. Pipito would have incurred NO attorney fees in the review/appeal process because he was NOT a party to it.

Fact: The court records indicate Pipito’s financial problems predate the variance appeal and were NOT caused by Kloppenburg. Pipito and his restaurant, Porticello, have been defendants in numerous lawsuits seeking to collect unpaid amounts owed. The lawsuits go back years."