Trump Makes National Anthem Great Again

Courtesy of Vince Megna

The $880,000 Mercedes Benz

From Vince Megna, King of the Lemon Laws, on his greatest victory yet:



A bit self-serving, but can't blame him for being proud. And it is comical.

Now if only there were lemon laws against politicians...

Save Mercedes. Kill the Lemon Law.

Lemon law expert Vince Megna is back at what he does best next to winning lawsuits - making great videos:



Those poor corporate CEOs.

Solidarity Fish Fry, Week 17: Well, That's A Fine Kettle Of Fish!

As advertised, last Friday was the seventeenth week for the Solidarity Fish Fry.

This one was no different than the other weeks in that there was good food, great solidarity and a bit of political discussion.

Upon arrival, seeing all the good people enjoying the solidarity and the abundance of tartar sauce, I saw Representative Chris Sinicki and her husband, Mike, who is a proud card-carrying union thug himself:

Well, OK, that isn't his union card he's holding, but there's nothing wrong with a fistful of fish either.

Sadly, while we did share some laughs, Rep. Sinicki had some bad news.  She said that the Republicans have 51 changes in store for unemployment insurance and are determined to ram them through committee and through both houses, regardless of what the UI Council has to say about things.

She said that the people should be ready to take action, for this is coming down the pike as soon as their done screwing with the mining bill.

But back to the fish fry, I had the extreme pleasure of dining with Kelley Albrecht, my blogdaughter Meg Moen (Cog Dis' own Meg!) and her friend, the fabulous Jenny G., who will talk your ear off if you let her:

Jenny on the left, Meg on the right

Other regulars were there as well, including the good folks from the Progressive Democrats of America.

But as we were dining, I looked up and saw none other than Vince Megna, the comic relief candidate for the state supreme court race.  I thought to myself how nice of him to come and support the union workers.

Except he didn't.

He and his companion headed straight to the non-union section.  With the help of Kelley, I was able to get a shot of him:

Megna is the gentleman in the white shirt.


Here's a blow up of him at his table.

So much for him being a man of the people.

As the gentle eater can see, if you miss a week, you miss a lot.

So don't miss out on any more.

Come join Randy, Meg and myself this Friday for Week 18.

And tell them that Cog Dis sent ya.

The Right's Greatest Fear: Independent Thought

It is no secret that the right wing spends unfathomable amounts of money on "controlling the message."  They have ersatz news media like Media Trackkkers, Wisconsin Distorter and MacGuyver Institute which are daily spewing the right wing talking points and trying to support them, even when they have to make up their own facts.

This was again demonstrated over the last couple of days.

Media Trackkkers thinks they have  a real scoop by trolling the Twitter feed of Graeme Zielinski, spokesman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, pointing out to a tweet showing that Zeilinski thinks that abortion is wrong.

ZOMG!

Zielinski dared to show independent thought!  He dared to have an opinion that did not meet the marching orders of the party!  Actually, it's not that out of line.  The Democrats have long believed in giving women the choice of what would happen to their bodies.  

Furthermore, Democrats believe in keeping abortion legal and rare.  That's where education and preventative actions come in.  Y'know the things that the right opposes.

Another example is that the right wing propagandists have also did their usual practice of McCarthyism by searching the recall petitions for the names of Ed Fallone and Vince Megna.  Sure enough, they found them.

They tried to make the fact that these gentlemen signed the recall petition mean they they are somehow impartial and extremely liberal  (as if being liberal is a bad thing.)  This theme was picked up by the usual suspects such as Charlie Sykes.

They have a few problems with this approach.  

First of all, the recall was hardly strictly partisan.  I know of several conservatives and Republicans that signed the recall petitions and voted against Walker.

Secondly, if Act 10 is contrary to the Constitution as Fallone demonstrated, well, wouldn't that actually make him more conservative than Pat Roggensack who has already shown that she doesn't care what the law or the Constitution says?

Supposedly, the conservatives are pro-Constitution, although that would be a hard one to prove if one judges by their actions and beliefs.

What Fallone and Megna did is what every Wisconsinite, including Brian Sikma, Charlie Sykes and all of the other sockpuppets did - they exercised their right of democracy afforded to them by the Constitution.

For the right wingers to be so desperate to make it appear otherwise is only a sign of their fear that they will lose another statewide race.

Early Endorsement: Fallone For Supreme Court

I knew about this for a few days and couldn't be happier:

Ed Fallone, an expert on constitutional and corporate law and a widely respected attorney, has announced he will run for Wisconsin Supreme Court.

“Attorneys, judges, elected leaders and citizens from around the State have urged me to run because they, like me, believe we need a change in the Supreme Court,” Fallone said. “The increased politicization of the court and the court's dysfunction exemplified by its inability to credibly handle allegations of inappropriate behavior by Justice Prosser are clearly damaging the court’s ability to deliver justice and serve the people of this state.”

Fallone has a broad base of legal experience. He has taught at Marquette University Law School for two decades, focusing on constitutional law, immigration law, securities regulation and corporate law. He also practices law with Gonzalez, Saggio & Harlan specializing in complex civil litigation including corporate law and contractual issues.

“The Wisconsin Supreme Court is dysfunctional and the only way to fix it is to change the personalities on the bench,” said Fallone. “I am not beholden to any political party or faction on the court or any special interest group. The people of Wisconsin expect -- and deserve -- judges who respect the importance of an independent judiciary and who are impartial and fair. That is the kind of Justice I will be.”

“The re-election of Justice Roggensack who is now a part of this dysfunctional court, will not help matters. The Wisconsin Supreme Court cannot police the legal profession if it refuses to police itself. When serious disciplinary charges are brought against a fellow Justice, the people deserve a Justice who will face the issue head on, not run away from it,” Fallone added.

Fallone would be the first Latino Justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. His mother immigrated to the United States from Mexico and Fallone grew up in a family equally proud of both its Italian and Mexican heritages. Fallone is married, with two children and lives in Whitefish Bay.

Fallone is active in the greater Milwaukee community. He has worked extensively with several nonprofit organizations serving at risk populations including Centro Legal Inc., The Catholic Charities Immigration Legal Assistance Program and The Latino Community Center. He has also been active in promoting education and support for stem cell research in the state as the President of Wisconsin Stem Cell Now. Fallone was recognized with the President’s Award from Community Shares of Greater Milwaukee in 2010.

Fallone will begin circulating nomination papers which are due to the Government Accountability Board in early January. The non-partisan election for the Supreme Court is in April 2013.

I first met Professor Fallone early in the year when I appeared in a panel to discuss the worth of recalls. I was impressed with Fallone's knowledge during the debate and even more impressed with him after the debate, when we joined our host in his home for some post-debate cocktails.

Fallone's knowledge is formidable. He is also an engaging speaker but is, well, judicial in the words he uses. He does not use inflammatory rhetoric and is truly only interested in what the law says and not the political aspect of things. This is evident in the way he reacted to questions the local paper put to him about his primary opponent, Vince Megna:

In an interview, Fallone agreed with Megna that Supreme Court races have taken on partisan overtones in recent years, but he eschewed Megna's political rhetoric.

"I think the elections for Wisconsin Supreme Court have become increasingly partisan, but I don't believe making them more partisan is helpful," Fallone said.

Another asset of Fallone's is that he knows exactly what he is going up against. He knows all about how the corporate backers who support Roggensack operate. And he's not afraid to call them out on their falsehoods.

When I handicapped the race a few weeks ago, I pointed out that the Honorable Maryann Sumi was considering a run. I thought that she would also make a fine Supreme Court Justice. I still do. Apparently so does Roggensack, since she support Sumi's decisions 12 out of 13 times.

But if she does chose to run, she will have the corporate special interests going after her for her Act 10 ruling, even though she was absolutely correct in her ruling. This will distract from her true qualifications.

Fallone won't have those problems, and is just as qualified as Sumi, if not more so.

It is because Fallone is highly qualified, extremely knowledgeable of both the Constitution and the law, and does not have any real or perceived ties to either party, nor the unions or corporate special interests which makes him the obvious choice to be on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

And that is why I am going to support him any way I can, including giving him my vote.

And We're Off To The Races....Again

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the Internet and be done with politics for a while, it raises its ugly head again.

Talk is already starting about the upcoming Supreme Court race, where Justice Patience Roggensack is up for reelection.

Roggensack is the least offensive of the conservative bloc of the Supreme Court. But that is only because she is the only one that hasn't been charged with ethics violations.

The crew she hangs with includes:

• Annette Ziegler, who presided over cases which included the bank at which her husband worked without disclosing it. This was found to be a matter of "serious and willful" misconduct.
• Michael Gableman, who broke judicial ethics laws by running a race-baiting campaign commercial he knew to be false.
• David Prosser, who physically assaulted another Supreme Court Justice, trying to choke her (then establishing an illegal legal defense fund). He also ruled to overturn the injunction against Act 10 without even bothering to consider the facts of the case and in apparent collaboration with the Republican leadership of the legislature.

Although Roggensack is the only conservative justice that is not or has not been under investigation, she is not without blemish.

She did unquestioningly go along with the incorrect and politically biased decision to reinstate Act 10, regardless of the facts. And after Prosser put a choke hold on their fellow justice, Roggensack twisted the law so that she could recuse herself and not hold Prosser accountable for his actions.

Needless to say, Roggensack is a mere puppet and rubber stamp for all that is wrong with the state and has willfully failed to meet her responsibilities as a justice on the highest court in the state.

So far, three people have either stated that they are running or are seriously considering it.

The one person to say that he is committed to running is Vince Menga, commonly known as the King of Lemon Laws, due to his proficiency in suing auto dealers who push faulty vehicles. Menga is also known for a series of videos, like this one, that he's made attacking Republicans and their foolish policies.

While Menga is undoubtedly familiar with the law, there is no way he could present himself as a impartial jurist. He's even refused to take on Republican clients, for crying out loud.

While I'm sure he's a nice guy, I just cannot take him seriously as a candidate to be a Supreme Court Justice.

Judge Maryann Sumi

One of the people considering running is none other than Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi. Judge Sumi is most well known for her proper decision to put an injunction against Act 10, which was passed in violation of the open meeting laws.

The Republicans/WMC/RWNJs will attack her for her decision. In fact, two right wing puppets have already done so. Owen Robinson slams her for not being neutral, while trying hard to ignore the acts of Roggensack, Gableman, Prosser and Ziegler and their WMC backing. Even more comical is the way that Jim Troupis - famous for his roles in Michael Best & Friedrich, the gerrymandering scandal and the voter suppression scheme - plays into the rubbish.

They will have a hard time slandering her though, given the fact that Roggensack herself has upheld decisions by Sumi 12 out of 13 times. And the one that Roggensack overturned was due to a clerical error, not an incorrect decision.

Out of the three potential candidates, the one with the most name recognition would have to be Judge Sumi. Her biggest problem would be if she could overcome the vast amount of corporate cash that will be poured into the race in an effort to buy it for Roggensack like they did for Ziegler, Gableman and Prosser.

The third person who is interested in a possible run is Professor Ed Fallone of Marquette University.

Professor Ed Fallone

I have had the pleasure of meeting Professor Fallone during a debate on the recalls last spring. I found Professor Fallone to be very erudite and able to work equally well with both liberals and conservatives.

But one should not let Professor Fallone's equanimity fool you. He is a constitutional scholar and does not let foolishness stand unaddressed, especially when the fool purposely tries to misrepresent the law and the Constitution.

You can also get a sampling of Professor Fallone's keen understanding of the law in his opinion about the more recent ruling which found Act 10 to be unconstitutional.

While Professor Fallone is unquestionably qualified for the job and is a great speaker and very personable, he would also have to overcome the juggernaut spending from groups like WMC.

I am not sure that he enjoys the same name recognition that Judge Sumi has, but that might not be a real problem. In the last Supreme Court race, JoAnne Kloppenburg came out of nowhere and almost won the race in just a couple of months.

I do have to admit finding it somewhat disconcerting that Professor Fallone expressed a reluctance to run if there was a primary. I certainly hope that this would not keep the public from the opportunity of voting for an extremely qualified candidate.

The one thing that each of the potential candidates, as well as the rest of us, needs to keep in mind is that the right will try to portray this race as some sort of referendum of Act 10. They will spout out their specious arguments that anyone opposing Roggensack is trying to thwart the will of the people or they are trying to somehow undo Walker's last two elections. Or that we are all a bunch of Muslim, Communist, Socialist, Pagan, [insert bigoted slur here], [insert misspelled vulgarity here]s.

This is, as the gentle reader knows, a load of poppycock.

First of all, Scott Walker testified, under oath, that he did NOT campaign on the union-busting measure. Nor was their any referendum regarding Act 10. So any claims that this was the will of the people is nothing but bovine manure.

This race is about who will best uphold the Constitution and act in good faith and with impartiality on how the law applies to any given case. And that is something that Roggensack has repeatedly demonstrated that she is either unable and/or unwilling to do.

And since someone will ask anyway, I would prefer to see Professor Fallone on the Supreme Court. That said, I would also have no problems with supporting Judge Sumi if she ends up being the candidate.