May 21, 2011

Oh noes: Is Kloppenburg lying about our Shark?

Alleges local right-wing perfesser of the law Rick Esenberg:
I understand the Kloppenburg campaign has been claiming that I "work for" [Wis. S. Ct. Justice David] Prosser. Not true. I have nothing to do with the Prosser campaign or the recount effort.
Prof. Rick proffers no evidence. I wonder how many layers of hearsay it would contain, if he had any. Maybe Kloppenburg got Esenberg mixed up with James Troupis, who is working for Prosser, because both Esenberg and Troupis were working for State Senate Republican majority leader Scott Fitzgerald, which you'd never know when Journal Communications, Inc. proffers Rick Esenberg as the disinterested academic observer.

Which he most certainly is not. He is a partisan political operator.

By the way, can somebody explain to me how come a Journal-Sentinel reader might have published by that organ a reference to Kloppenburg as "Kloppenpig," which subsequently receives 82 122 (as of this writing) "thumbs up," more than almost any other comment in this thread, but when another J-S reader calls the organ's right-wing calumnist Patrick McIlheran a "dick" (with good cause), the latter observation disappears with nary the opportunity to garner even one solitary "thumb up"?

Apparently you get to write your own rules in a one-newspaper town.


gnarlytrombone said...

My suspicion is that there is no formal, regularized moderation and that there are few if any FTEs responsible for it. It all depends on whether a staffer happens to see something, or someone hits the "report abuse" link. They took down that Lena Taylor "ax" comment within a minute of me reporting it.

illusory tenant said...

Well they got a big consistency problem at least. In the meantime the wing-nut recount opposers are loving this recount 1000x more than the actual recount supporters, as predicted.

krshorewood said...

This was the danger of this fool's errand. It was impossible to come back from 7,000 votes, no matter how screwed up it was in Waukesha.

Now the yahoos have something to get fired up about. Just hoping that this hootin' and holler' on the JS thread represents a sliver.

illusory tenant said...

Yessir. I have absolutely no knowledge of the inner workings of that campaign (they wouldn't even add me to their email list) but I would bet money the silk stockings advised against this escapade.

DairyStateMom said...

Methinks the JS comment policy sez it's OK to be mean-spirited but not use body part language or four-letter words. Some of the comments seem also to be attempts at anti-Semetism (can one be anti-Semetic if the target isn't Jewish? I have no information on Ms. Kloppenburg's religious sensibilities or heritage).