In another revealing Supreme Court electoral debate, Justice David Prosser literally attacked his opponent verbally, by accusing Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg of being something he heard was true. I’m not kidding:
jsonline: Prosser said Kloppenburg held "extreme political and social views" but did not specify what they were. "She's trying to camouflage her views and not level with the people of Wisconsin," Prosser said. "She is an unbending ideologue. And I wouldn't say that if I hadn't heard that multiple times."
I can’t help wondering if what Prosser hears often also influences his judicial decisions, facts be damned? Oh, there’s more. In a country with only one righteous political philosophy, conservativism, you can’t hide from your traitorous liberal leanings:
Prosser linked Kloppenburg to Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, whom he called an activist and liberal. Kloppenburg interned for Abrahamson about 25 years ago but said she is independent.
"It's ludicrous to say someone will be the clone of someone they interned for many years ago," she said.Prosser of course is okay with bashing his colleague and Chief Justice.
The Journal Sentinel phrased Kloppenburg’s response as taking “shots” at Prosser, equating her comments to the petty partisan sniping of her opponent:
Kloppenburg also took shots at Prosser, citing personal divisions on the court and an outburst a year ago when Prosser called Abrahamson a "bitch" and threatened to "destroy" her.
She said Prosser had castigated his fellow justices in his opinions and said such writings could taint the image of the court and lead people to wonder if decisions were based on "personal vendettas."
True, or just taking shots?