Patterico's Pontifications

4/21/2011

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:32 pm



Just go to 1:30 and watch for 30 seconds. This is the hack judge who thought she had won in Wisconsin, and declared herself the winner . . . right before she lost.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

48 Responses to “Hahahahahahahahahahaha”

  1. “I’m a winner in so many ways”….except at the ballot box.

    My reaction was the same as yours, Patterico: it was downright funny watching her squirm when presented with a question she knew the answer to but couldn’t bear to tell the truth.

    Some chump (e84e27)

  2. Says a lot about the kind of judge she would be, don’t you think?

    Rule the legally proper way? Or the way you WANT to rule?

    Well, the law is flawed in so many ways . . .

    Patterico (c218bd)

  3. she’s the hoochie what promised when she was judge she’d vote for so the union thug whore teachers and cops could rape the wisconsin treasury til it bled sawdust

    happyfeet (760ba3)

  4. The dead air is amazing – if you don’t think you are still the winner, why are you wasting the taxpayers’ money on a recount? D’oh!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  5. I have been laughing at this all day, since I saw it on Althouse’s blog.

    She just sits there thinking about what answer she could possibly give. She was thinking about the other interview (just references) where she stubbornly said she won, even though the results weren’t in yet.

    Says a lot about the kind of judge she would be, don’t you think?

    In ten foot high neon blinking letters. She doesn’t follow the evidence. She doesn’t accurately report the law. She is stubborn in the face of a truth she doesn’t want.

    Also, she’s quite snide. In her other press conference, she was rudely thanking Prosser for his years of service. It was very tongue in cheek and I thought unprofessional. I know many had noted there was some kind of counting error. I have to assume that such a campaign had staff analyzing it. Kloppenburg’s timing in her original ‘I won’ conference suggests she knew Prosser was going to get many votes in the county that appears to have failed to report all votes, and she wanted to play hardball by casting a shadow over the election.

    Her behavior doesn’t do much to change my mind.

    “I won in many ways”. Is this about Kloppenburg’s self esteem, or the will of the people? I hear this recount is going to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. If Kloppenburg thinks it’s worth it to clear up this clerk’s mistake (after it’s already been examined), surely she also thinks it’s time to shine light on voter ID and registration verification.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  6. The law absolutely does not require a recount. Given the margin of victory, the law does allow her to request one at taxpayer expense.

    That someone seeking a seat on the highest court in the state is unaware of the distinction is all the proof you need of her incompetence.

    Blue Ox (ff919a)

  7. Two thoughts, that run in somewhat opposite directions:

    1. When the margin is this close, a recount should be automatic; the losing candidate shouldn’t have to request it, and bear the blame for the money spent. It should be regarded as a necessary expense for the electoral authority, in order to determine the correct outcome.

    2. There is a major flaw in the way recounts seem to be conducted in the USA: the assumption that if two counts differ the later one is more reliable than the earlier one. That makes no sense. If I count money twice and get different sums, I don’t assume which of them is correct. I count again, and keep counting until I get the same number twice running. That’s how votes should be counted; if all your counts differ then none of them is reliable. At least the way the Democrats seem to play the game, the rule seems to be keep counting until you get the result you want, and then stop, even if that result is a fluke!

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  8. That 13 seconds was the only time she was not being mendoucheus.

    JD (318f81)

  9. doesn’t it seem that leftist women tend to be hideously ugly?

    Real American (4cdb6a)

  10. Wasn’t she the one who said that Prosser should “save the state of Wisconsin the cost of a recount” when she thought she had won by a mere couple-hundred votes?

    And now, with over 7,000 votes separating her from the guy who ACTUALLY won, she wants a recount paid for by the state?

    I think I have a shadenb*ner…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  11. Another ocelli stolen by the Kock Brothers.

    JD (318f81)

  12. Another election stolen by the Kock Brothers.

    JD (318f81)

  13. The dead air is amazing – if you don’t think you are still the winner, why are you wasting the taxpayers’ money on a recount? D’oh!

    The answer libtards always give, in truth though never in voice:

    “Because I can.”

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  14. Okay, here goes the recount:

    ONE pathetic loser. There — finished.

    Icy Texan (82fcef)

  15. I hear this recount is going to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    The vid says a full million, Dustin.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  16. doesn’t it seem that leftist women tend to be hideously ugly?

    Inside even when not so outside, RA…

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  17. The vid says a full million, Dustin.

    Oh, people watch more than the silent part, over and over?

    Anyway, thanks for correcting me. Such a waste of money.

    The law absolutely does not require a recount.

    Exactly, Blue Ox. She’s had so much time and more than enough motivation to understand the law on recounts. It’s amazing that she got this wrong, or speaks incorrectly for dramatic effect. That’s not judicial.

    Daily Kos: Prosser has a responsibility not to ask for recount because 200 votes is a fairly comfortable margin.

    One guy even says the 200 votes constitutes a landslide. Another demands the Koch brothers pay for the recount. That ‘diarist’ hasn’t posted a single pixel since we learned Prosser won the election.

    I know, what do you expect from Kos level creeps.

    I really need to take this 13 seconds of silence an animated .gif of constant democrat honesty. It would make a nice screen saver.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  18. There will be no Christine Gregoire or Al Franken style reprieve for Kloppenburg. The scale of her loss is beyond the margin of fraud for a recount to carry her to victory. Yet she believes it will.

    That is the reason for the 30 second pause. She wants to say she won, but she knows enough to fear how badly the press and public would react to such an answer.

    Kloppenburg,

    Thanks a lot for wasting a million dollars of the taxpayers money on a pointless recount. You loser.

    Brad (ab3e97)

  19. Damn, if it wasn’t such a long pause it would make a great GOP political commercial. Maybe they can cut it and show her at 10 sec intervals. In any event the state GOP has to get an exact cost of the recount and use it to hammer the Dems in the next election.

    scr_north (0eb815)

  20. Damn, if it wasn’t such a long pause it would make a great GOP political commercial.

    How about this?

    You show her silent squirm.

    Superimposed over that, you have a message saying:

    A) The taxpayers should be able to expect leaders to respect the value of their hard earned money.

    B) The voters expect democrat and union leaders to accept a loss in an election, and let the WI Legislature pass laws without quorum stunts, union imposed anarchy, death threats, screams drowning out a Tea Party argument, or hopeless recounts.

    And then let it end with Kloppenburg’s “I won in a lot of ways”.

    I’d even stretch the pause out dramatically to 30 seconds. Let the democrats complain that the pause wasn’t that long, just to underline the actual pause, which is so embarrassing. What then? The media showing the actual pause length? Painful.

    In the April 6 press conference, Klopp was asked for her thoughts on the media’s coverage of each candidate (aggressively partisan) and she said “I loved it”. It’s that bad. The GOP has to take the initiative on their message. Though I have to admit, WI’s GOP appears to have their act together already.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  21. This woman can serve our country’s future well.

    Parents nationwide can admonish their children to finish their vegetables, or “that lady will come and eat you!”

    Estragon (ec6a4b)

  22. BEWARE THE CHOMPENBURG! She will muse uncomfortably for 4 minutes and then suck out your brains! She’s allergic to beta carotene, though, so eat up.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  23. As I watched, during the gap itself, I thought to myself: “This lawyer aspired to be a judge on the highest court of her state — an appellate court whose nearly only face-to-face professional interaction with its citizenry is through the medium of oral argument in significant appeals.”

    I had the privilege of clerking for an appellate judge, and in the course of that year I was privileged to watch many oral arguments. As a practicing lawyer, I’ve made about a dozen myself in the years since, and on each of those occasions I’ve watched all the arguments in all of the other cases of that morning or afternoon session.

    I cannot recall ever seeing any appellate lawyer so pole-axed by a simple, obvious question from the bench.

    I’ve practiced trial law for 30 years, I’ve appeared in trial courts hundreds of times, and witnessed or participated in thousands of oral hearings. I can’t ever recall seeing any trial lawyer so gape-mouthed either.

    I’m sure she must have some loyal and appreciative clients; it’s silly to appraise someone’s entire professional worth on the basis of one Q&A exchange in a press conference.

    But would anyone who’s not already her loyal fan, but who’s watched that tape, want Ms. Kloppenburg as his or her lawyer in any sort of court proceeding? I certainly wouldn’t.

    Beldar (cd529f)

  24. Beldar

    It was a moment – where the unions may have had their last hurrah

    This is why the court system is now a political arm of the left

    EricPWJohnson (6c5758)

  25. Prediction : the result of the recount wil be to increase Prosser’s margin of victory.

    Michael M. Keohane (996c34)

  26. yeah, i admit i had never heard her speak before this and… just wow. what a complete ditz.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  27. We need to save the environment before global warming causes us to freeze to death!!!Elventyone!!!

    There won’t be any trees left if we keep using paper well I wanna read the NY slimes

    /Liberal

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  28. Waiting this long gives them three legs up on winning. They now know that no more votes will be found for their opponent, they know how many votes they need to steal the election, and they’ve searched every car trunk in Wisconsin so when the time comes, they can find the right number of ballots to benefit her.

    Just as franken did. The dems are perfecting stealing elections because they know they can’t win with o’s policies.

    Jim (844377)

  29. Kloppy is a true liberal, happy to piss away taxpayer money in the never-ending quest for more and more power for herself.

    “This state deserves a justice who respects the law…”–Kloppy

    Also, one that will abide by election results.

    Dave Surls (b7b4a0)

  30. Estragon at #21 FTW

    Tully (62151d)

  31. From what I know I think there is a reasonable case for a recount, that she can’t make it or make a better response to the obvious question to be asked shows her inadequacy for any position requiring critical thought, IMHO.

    Not only was the election within 0.5%, there was the snafu regarding all of Brookfield’s votes being overlooked the first time.

    I think she would have been reasonable had she said, “I don’t know if I’ve won or not, that’s why we’re asking for a recount. Not only were the results close, but with the mishap with the original counting I think many people will have confidence in the election result only after the recount is made.”

    Now, that being said, I agree 100% about the hypocrisy of the left and of this candidate, and how foolish she was in her original speech claiming victory. And as I said above, even though I think there was a straightforward case to be made for the recount, she couldn’t/didn’t do it, and instead mulled over the abstract of how can she “make it positive”.

    “Somebody” ought to collect all of these two faced remarks, from all parties, and show them to candidates to let them know that at least some are paying attention and not everyone is stupid, so clean up their act, and to show them to the public. In a 30 second clip, how many episodes of “that was then”/”this is now” can you get to communicate you cannot trust a person/ or a party?

    And yes, it would be good, to see precedent for a trust-worthy recount process, or arrest the SOB’s trying to pull a fast one and give them the max sentence to make a point. I imagine, if “they” were interested, one or more “stings” could be set up along the way to catch the dishonest, but I know there are things you can and cannot do so it is not entrapment.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  32. BWHAAAAA Look at the people in the background, where was the cheering then???

    She looks like the bride of frankenstein.

    Heidi (a9a9b3)

  33. She almost won.

    This is not a victory. It looks more like a bump on the way to defeat.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  34. Just to be clear, JoAnne Kloppenburg is not a hack judge. She is a hack assistant attorney general.

    Joshua (9ede0e)

  35. A simple hack is more than sufficient in describing her.

    JD (a8f2ae)

  36. In all that dead air time one should have been hearing the clunking and grinding of her powerful brain gears working away. But nothing–nada–just silence. Hilarious.

    elissa (c74994)

  37. She didn’t lose. It’s just that her appeal is more selective than her opponent’s.

    Bud Norton (29550d)

  38. Judge? I never saw where she was a judge. What bench did she preside over?
    ^..^(____)~~~

    Cheshirecat (0cd6a2)

  39. By the way, other than being admitted to the bar in Wisconsin, an assistant attorney general is nothing more than a political appointed hack who needs some state income since she can’t make a living as a “real” attorney.

    Cheshirecat (0cd6a2)

  40. She’s not a hack judge. She’s a hack prosecutor who, for whatever reason, fancies she could be a judge.

    Federal Dog (8dc08a)

  41. “Not only was the election within 0.5%, there was the snafu regarding all of Brookfield’s votes being overlooked the first time.”

    MD in Philly – The snafu was a non-event. Brookfield’s votes were tallied and reported locally. People following the election closely knew Brookfield’s results election night. Waukesha county failed to report Brookield’s results along with the rest of the county’s results when they reported them to the state. The omission was caught and subsequently examined by the state. The votes originally reported by Brookfield on election night did not change. Nothing to see here except Democrats trying to delegitimize the election.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  42. She’s not a hack judge, she’s a whack judge. Holy crap!

    Steven S. (e5c232)

  43. And that “vote tally error” was written off by the senior Dem in that area.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  44. ________________________________________

    This is the hack judge who thought she had won in Wisconsin

    People like her — in which their basic wisdom/common sense can fit in a thimble, with room to spare — should be kept in mind during a debate that involves the arcane, esoteric details of the US Constitution. IOW, when deluded, dangerous fools like Kloppenburg (whose clones at the federal level dominate the 9th Circuit Court) are managing things, forget what the legal framework of this nation says or doesn’t say. Leftists — far, far more than rightists — will make mincemeat of the sanity and proper checks and balances that exist in generations of legislative and judicial rule making.

    Mark (411533)

  45. The MacIver Institute kicks so much tail, it should play for the Green Bay Packers. Every state should have a MacIver News Service, it would make policing the left so much easier.

    Pat, I tweeted you a link to this knowing you’d love it. I didn’t think to check to see if you already had it.

    L.N. Smithee (9eaf5d)

  46. Ditto what LN said.

    JD (318f81)

  47. daley-

    You are correct in the details of what happened (as I understand it). I guess what I’m saying is she could make at least what appeared to be a reasonable case, but didn’t, and I guess the fact that a recount will cost money is a good reason not to do it lightly.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  48. TwoThree bagger.

    Hazy (996c34)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1168 secs.