Verify Your Signature

I’ve spent Saturday through today helping to verify the recall signatures. Sure, we found a few goofy signatures—Condi Rice, Adolf Hitler, and the like, but mostly they were just regular folks signing their names.

The thing that surprised me the most was how poorly people filled out their information. Most of the petitions had places for a printed name, a signature, a street address (no PO boxes), a city, a zip code, a municipality, and a date.

Yet people left things blank, crossed things of, scribble, or left things incomplete. It was the weirdest thing. When I am signing something important, I like to think that I read the details first, fill it out, then check it over. So I was surprised that there were so many errors.

Another thing that surprised me is how many people don’t seem to know what their municipality is. If you live in Milwaukee, your municipality can’t be Wauwatosa. Many people seemed to put their county name there instead of the place they vote.

The thing that bothered me the most was the initials people thought corrected errors. For example, if I were signing the petition and filled out all the information including the date, the person circulating the petition has no right to change my information and initial it. Putting the initials there did not make the change okay. There were probably thousands of signatures I have seen in the past few days where the person circulating the petition wrote in or changed the date, municipality, address, even the very NAME on a petition and initialed the change. That is the equivalent of you writing me a check and me changing the amount of the check and initialing it. You don’t get to change that sort of thing. There were a lot of initials-happy circulators, and as a Walker supporter, I thank you. But I do cringe that people seem to think that’s okay.

Anyway, it has been a truly interesting experience. It’s my opinion that there was a lot of fraud—both intentional and unintentional—but that most of the signatures were from people who just disagree with Walker. I hope we never have to do this again, but I did get a chance to meet all kinds of new people who like were riled up by these events. If anything, I think this recall has brought together conservatives and made us stronger. So, thanks, recallers.

1. Hi Wendy.  I think some people get confused on the municipality thing because they have an address like mine.  I like and vote in the city of Madison, but my mailing address is Verona.  It happens more often than you would think that the mailing address is different than where you vote.  It happens on the edges of municipalities.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 31, 2012 at 1653 hrs
   
   
   

2. In my hometown, my mailing address was different from my municipality. But some of these were counties apart. It was odd.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 31, 2012 at 1728 hrs
   
   
   

3. That could be a reason, commenter #1—I’m reminded now of years when I lived in one of those transitioning eras, which had been rural.  We weren’t even in a municipality; our house was in one township—but on a private road, so our mailbox was half a mile away at the highway and in another township.  (It took years to get the county and the postal service to agree on which was our address and thus our township.)  Our school district had the name of the nearest town, so people often used that.  But our phone company put us in an area code of yet another town, so other people used that. 

   And the one time that we had to call an ambulance, it took forever, because the dispatcher disagreed with the address agreed upon by the county (and the postal service).  Loved the country life, but life actually is simpler in some ways in the city!

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 31, 2012 at 1838 hrs
   
   
   

4. According to Wisconsin law, the circulator is allowed to correct an address, municipality, and date (like adding the year).  They cannot touch the name nor the signature.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 31, 2012 at 2116 hrs
   
   
   

5. if anyone knows what pages have West Bend residents, that’d be good info

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 31, 2012 at 2151 hrs
   
   
   

6. A quick glance over the internet - my guess is an average of 1/3 of the signatures are invalid: missing contact information, signatures by one person signing for a block of votes, etc.

   Posted by Brian Dunbar on January 31, 2012 at 2241 hrs
   
   
   

7. John,

   Will you please cite your source? That is not how I understand it.

   Posted by Owen on February 01, 2012 at 0644 hrs
   
   
   

8. “If anything, I think this recall has brought together conservatives and made us stronger. So, thanks, recallers.”

   It has also moved a lot of independents to the right (or farther to the right).
   Some of you would be surprised at how many union members will not vote for democrats any longer.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 0722 hrs
   
   
   

9. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/gab/2.pdf

   The courts have interpreted GAB 2.05(4) and (5) to allow corrections by the circulator on a petition prior to it being turned in, and by affidavit after it is turned in.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 0819 hrs
   
   
   

10. I would also like to add it is written on the back of any nomination paper.  Not sure what is written on the back of a recall petition since I never looked at one, but GAB 2.09(5) treats them the same.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 0822 hrs
    
    
    

11. Those sections don’t say that a circulator can correct information except by affadavit within three days of the filing deadline. I don’t see anything that says that a circulator can correct information on the form itself.

    Posted by Owen on February 01, 2012 at 0825 hrs
    
    
    

12. Also, 2.05 only applies to nomination papers.

    Posted by Owen on February 01, 2012 at 0829 hrs
    
    
    

13. Never mind. I see in 2.09 that 2.05 also applies for petitions

    Posted by Owen on February 01, 2012 at 0829 hrs
    
    
    

14. The courts have interpreted GAB 2.05(4) and (5) to allow corrections by the circulator on a petition prior to it being turned in, and by affidavit after it is turned in.  They have also interpreted that ditto marks under a valid address is valid as well.

    Wisconsin goes out of its way to allow ballot access, it is very hard to not make the ballot.  The presumption is always to try to get a signature to count unless there are some obvious flaws (cannot read any of an address to try to figure out what it is, entire date is missing, no name).  As GAB 2.09(5) says, recall are treated like nomination petitions.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 0847 hrs
    
    
    

15. I’m going to be helping to create the database at verify the recall.  (I’ll be a data entry lacky.)

    In the Village of Kewaskum, I pulled the voter registration list.

    Once the database is up, I will search and check every signer in Kewaskum.

    Aside from the normal obvious petition issues, I’m going to check:

    1.) Are they a registered voter?  (If so, that’s fine.)

    2.)  If its a voter in Kewaskum I know would never sign this atrocity in a million years I will check with them.  (If they signed, that’s fine…If not, the fraud will be exposed.)  I will definitely be hacked off if I’m (or my wife) is on the petition.  (I will use the term “Democratic fraudsters” forever if this happens.)

    3.)  If its NOT a registred voter in Kewaskum:

    A.) is address legitimate?  If so, does that person actually live there?  If not legitimate address, I will forward fraud to legitimate authorities…to investigate circulator.

    B.)  If legitimate address, check in with that person to confirm they signed.  If so, that’s fine.

    This will produce interesting results, aside from any fraud.  How many actual signers are registered and BOTHERED TO VOTE FOR GOV. IN 2010!

    I will relay my results back to Walker campaign.

    I encourage those of you in West Bend to do the same.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 0852 hrs
    
    
    

16. John,

    You’ll have to cite the court cases, because I’m not aware of that interpretation. The plain reading of the statute clearly says that the information can only be corrected by affadavit, so if there was a court that intepreted it as broadly as you say, then it was a bad ruling. Still, I’d like to see the ruling and the reasoning behind it.

    Posted by Owen on February 01, 2012 at 0914 hrs
    
    
    

17. I live on a street that has ten houses on it.  The street sign on one end of the block spells the name as three words, and on the other end it’s spelled as two words.  The official USPS street name combines all three words into one.

    Given this situation I would still manage to use one of these names correctly if signing a petition.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1023 hrs
    
    
    

18. As a preface to my comment, I didn’t vote for Walker in 2010, but I will be voting for him in 2012. My wife is a public worker and we have no issue with the changes he made.

    @Kevin: While I commend your passion and even your efforts regarding verifying the recall, I warn you to be careful about what you do with the information you find or lists you create. If you are working with the Walker campaign in an official capacity, then you can share your information with them (obviously). If you are working with the groups We the People of the Republic and The Wisconsin Grandsons of Liberty, the groups responsible for www.verifytherecall.com, you cannot have any communication with the Walker campaign. In fact, on the verifytherecall.com website, it says this:

    This project is undertaken in an effort to ensure the integrity of Wisconsin’s elections and associated processes. The project is an independent, non-partisan effort. In no way is this project affiliated with, or in communication with, any candidate or public official, or with any campaign. This project does not endorse or oppose any public officials or candidates for public office.

    Now, postings reports, etc on a public website and allowing the Walker campaign to “find” such information is one thing. But actually calling or emailing someone affiliated with the Walker campaign is definitely not allowed and would threaten your efforts.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1056 hrs
    
    
    

19. They’re almost a microcosm of why poltiics in America is such a disaster these days.  People are dumb.  Really, really dumb. And I think it’s because so little is expected of us in general.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1242 hrs
    
    
    

20. I scanned the first 1000 pages, and what I saw sort of saddened me.

    I did spot 3 duplicates (see pages 611 and 612), which I have reported.  I really don’t want to think this was due to any malice, but rather 3 people who signed what was put before them without question.  Or perhaps without the wherewithal refuse to sign again for whatever reason.

    It saddens me that so very many people who state, by virtue of their signature, that they impassioned about the issue, and did not know how to, or could not be bothered to take the time to, enter the appropriate information in the designated spaces.  Note the number of people who put “WI” in the space marked “ZIP”.  And the number of people who did not enter a voting municipality.  There are lots of signatures where this spot is blank, or the whole page has that part written in by very obviously the same person. 

    There also seem to be a fair number of entries where the address is written by someone other than the signer.  Does anyone know the validity of someone else entering that information?  I do understand that many people who are eligible to vote are unable to write, at least in English.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1459 hrs
    
    
    

21. Floyd,

    Don’t worry, I don’t work for either group in any capacity.

    I’m just a hacked off voter.

    I’m only a volunteer for data entry via interenet.  I’m hoping to use the complete database, which will be available to everyone, and compare database to Kewaskum’s voter registration list and provide my results to all.

    I’ll be really fascinated how many petition signers even bothered to vote in 2010 for gov.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1513 hrs
    
    
    

22. (see pages 611 and 612),

    Now that’s weird, 611 is a Walker recall petition while 612 and 613 are Rebecca Kleefisch recall petitions (Which is why there is a duplicate name from 611 to 612). But what I want to know is: Did they mix the Kleefisch and Walker petitions together? Or is this just an anomaly?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1617 hrs
    
    
    

23. DirkB:

    Wow, I just wanna slap my head and say ‘duh’ now!.

    Great catch.  Page 613 is also for Kleefisch.

    Well, there’s 10 signatures we can toss.

    This just gets more fun as we go!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1633 hrs
    
    
    

24. It is pretty terrifying how people can claim to care so passionately about something but take zero interest in putting in effort to actually learn about it, prefering instead to just go with whatever their mass medium of choice tells them to believe.  And that’s not something unique to one side of the partisan divide or the other.  It’s going to get ugly.  It already is quite ugly.  But it’s going to get worse.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1643 hrs
    
    
    

25. After seeing these petitions, I don’t blame people for signing more than once. There are so many pages that will get dumped because the circulator screwed up in signing the bottom of the page, and each petitioner has to trust the circulator to hand in the petition and to do it properly. I hope we never have to go through this sort of thing again, but I hope someone finds a better way to do it.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 1919 hrs
    
    
    

26. I hope we never have to go through this sort of thing again, but I hope someone finds a better way to do it.

    Back in Texas we called that an ‘election’.

    Posted by Brian Dunbar on February 01, 2012 at 2000 hrs
    
    
    

27. Touche.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 01, 2012 at 2028 hrs
    
    
    

28. “Back in Texas we called that an ‘election’.”

    LOL!  I thnk they used to value those here too.  Antique Roadshow.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 02, 2012 at 0848 hrs
    
    
    

29. You know, if you created a database table that contained the name and address of everyone that signed the recall, all that should be necessary to weed out duplicates would be having a unique index on those two fields.  I mean, it would automatically prevent you from entering combinations of those two fields more than once.  So John Smith at 123 A street, would only get into the database once.  It would automatically cut down on the duplicate signatures, and would make it trivial to stop people from signing different sheets of paper with the hope that the second or third signatures don’t get caught.

    Of course, this doesn’t fix the fraudulently entered names (people who would never sign such a thing), but makes the list of names you’d have to check for that shorter.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 02, 2012 at 0854 hrs
    
    
    

30. Kevin, you don’t mean to tell me that you are going to call everyone in Kewaskum who signed the recall petition?

    Kevin you need to remember that you are a leader in this community and that the people in our community who signed the recall petition are a minority not in the state but certainly in the area. I spent my weekends overseeing and collecting signatures at the Kewaskum Union Hall. No volunteers at the Kewaskum Union Hall participated in fraud, but many people were afraid to sign or collect signatures in the town in which they worked. Kevin, when people live in fear of openly expressing their political views, calling them and asking them about the recall petition, borders on harassment.

    What reason do you have to suspect fraud?  What purpose would it serve given that a recall only secures an election not the results of that election?  If you’re really that concerned about fraud come next door and we can talk about it.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 02, 2012 at 2022 hrs
    
    
    

31. It is pretty terrifying how people can claim to care so passionately about something but take zero interest in putting in effort to actually learn about it, prefering instead to just go with whatever their mass medium of choice tells them to believe.

    Or how about when people - and in fact a state political party - care so passionately about Senate seats that they go through the time, effort and expense of recalling Senators - when a year or two earlier they didn’t care enough to actually even bother fielding a candidate.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 02, 2012 at 2126 hrs
    
    
    

32. Bret,

    I can’t believe you talk about the climate of fear.  Weren’t the unions the ones that threatened Wisconsin business for supporting Walker with campaign finance reports in hand?  Johnsonville?  Sargento? M&I?  I was completely disgusted by that.  Will the unions apologize for purposely hurting WI business and jobs?  (I guess its the thanks we get as over-worked taxpayers.)

    I’m only going to call people I’m friends with that I know would not sign this petition. That is not anywhere near the accusation you put out there.  I also know several people well, that I consider my friends, that would sign this petition…I got no problem with that at all, so I would not waste my time calling those I know, truly, want to wipe out the 2010 election.

    I’ve reviewed 9000 pages today.  Found 5 total signatures from Kewaskum.  None of these pages seemed like they were gathered at Union Hall.

    1 of the signers is a street that does not exist in the village (or town) and a voter that is not registered and did not vote in 2010 election for Gov.  I’ve asked for that one to be struck.  (What more can you say when a signer claims to live in the Village, they are not registered, did not vote, and their street where they allege their adress is, does not exist.)

    2 of the signers are registeed, did vote in 2010, but the circulator messed up the bottom and I’ve asked for the whole page to be struck.

    2 others are registered, did vote, and the petition looks good.

    I did not call anyone because I know 2 of them and they would sign the petition and I don’t know the other 2.  (Unfortunately, I can’t call the other 1.)

    Bret, I appreciate your assurance that your petition efforts meet the finest legal standards.  I look forward to seeing your work.  I’m sure I will have a difficult and challenging time being critical of your petition work.  However, it is apparant, after looking at 9000 pages, others around the state do not hold your high petition gathering standards.

    I will be compiling statistics on how many recall petition signers are registered and bothered to vote in 2010 election in Kewaskum.  I think that will be fascinating information to all.

    This petition is attempting to negate my 2010 vote for Walker.  When a petition is attempting to negate my vote, I want to make sure everything is in order.

    Compared to Union tactics against Wisconain business last year, what I’m doing is not anywhere close…which is 60% review, 30% statistical gathering, and 10% (if that) follow-up to people I normally have conversations with.

    So if you want to talk about the double standards here, let’s chat.  I really don’t quibble with your quality claim of petitions at Union Hall, (so no need to chat about that, I believe you, but will verify).  However, the Union Hall was not the only petition stop for residents of Kewaskum to sign.

    This is what democracy looks like…don’t you think?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 02, 2012 at 2130 hrs
    
    
    

33. After seeing the Mass hysteria of the wild eyed recallers, I don’t put anything past them.

    I’d like to thank Kevin, and ALL those helping to verify the recall.
    It’s important to check the slop they’ve submitted, THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

    BTW, All this over them having to pay what amounts to 1 Starbucks a day?? Hmmmmmm, sound familiar? Geeeez, it’s for the kids.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 03, 2012 at 0837 hrs
    
    
    

34. Ditto what Kevin said.  Have been working on Verify the Recall team doing data entry.  I continue reading, taking notes and following suit.

    Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 03, 2012 at 1811 hrs
    
    
    

35. UPDATE:

    I’ve plowed through 13,000 pages in 2 days and results are interesting so far.

    In those pages, 7 signers mark “Village of Kewaskum” as their residence.

    1 of those signers is not registered, did not vote in village in 2010 for gov, and the street address DOES NOT Exist in Village.  I’ve asked for this signature to be struck.

    1 of those, the street does exist, but street number is suspicious.  The person is not registered, and did not vote in village in 2010 for gov.  I am going to actually drive out to the alleged address later today to confirm whether the house number does or does not exist.  If I find no house at that address, I will demand this signature be struck and ask DA to look into this one, and the circulator, who is from Green Bay.

    3 of signers were registered and did vote, but I consider circulator portion defective, by circulator either not filling in correct municipality of residence or filling in wrong municipality on circulator affirmation at bottom.  I’ve requested these 3 signatures be struck.  (Along with all the other signatures on those pages.) 

    2 other signers are registered, did vote in 2010, and petition looks good.

    Based on what Bret has said about Union Hall petition gathering above, I have not hit that block of petitions, and I suspect the success rate of those signatures will be much higher and will be done much more properly.

    To think, I’m ALMOST 10% of the way through the total pile.

    One giant observation.  I can’t believe there is a million signatures.

    There is a common petition format with max 5 signatures on a page.  That is prevelant about 20% of the time.  Many sheets are mail in 1 signature which count as a whole page.  Nearly 30% of 10-line pettitions have less than 5 signatures, many with 1 or 2 only.

    There are also a ton of “not submitted” pages on GAB web site where its assigned a page number out of the 153,000 pages, but nothing is there.  I’d say that happens 3-5% of the time.  I’m not sure what that is all about, but those pages have no signatures.  (Did GAB disqualify those pages for obvious reasons already??)

    At 153,000 pages, one has to average about 7 signatures a page to get to 1 million.

    The math just does not work to get to a million, looking at first 13,000 pages.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 04, 2012 at 1435 hrs
    
    
    

36. Kevin,

    You are treading on dangerous ground.  First of all, people who signed do not need to be registered to vote—only eligible to vote in the State of Wisconsin.

    Second of all, while I understand your enthusiasm to verify signatures, what you are doing borders on harassment and intimidation.  To take it upon yourself to contact people in your municipality to verify that they signed.  What will you do if you find that everyone you contacted did sign?  Will you post a list of their names so that they can be further contacted by others?  What purpose does it serve but to fuel your own misguided interests?

    I hope you also realize that you are a business owner in Kewaskum.  Because of your stance, I will no longer patronize your business when I drive through Kewaskum—not because you support Walker, but because you have taken it upon yourself to police the process and to make contact with people who exercised their rights under the law.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 1636 hrs
    
    
    

37. Vince,

    I realize people don’t have to be registered to sign.  I find it fascinating that anyone unregistered, and possibly did not vote in 2010 for gov., would sign this petition!  I’d like to know how many people fit into this category.  I’d also like to make sure, and encourage, these unregistered voters…register to vote.

    I know why you are really upset about this.  Its bad PR to have a lot of recall signers who did not bother to vote in 2010.  I think that’s important information to know.

    As far as contact, if its an unregistered voter, I will welcome them to the Village, where appropriate, encourage them to vote and register for local elections this month.  If the unregistered person did not sign, I will leave them a copy of the petition.

    I’ve already found 2 names of people who claim to live in Village, but don’t.  So its hard to make contact with people that do not exist as residents in the Village.  1 of them seems like someone who has no clue which municipality in which they live, another one is very concerning as its aa Village address that does not exist and the signer is not registered and has never voted in village of Kewaskum. 

    Finally, Vince, I’m tired of business being threatened in this state because the leaders of the business have a political opinion.  If you are going to say a local public official cannot take a direct interest in a constituent petition for reddress of grievance, talk with some constituents about the grievance….then God help our Democracy.

    Could you point me to your rule book where the !st amendment has been obliterated?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 1728 hrs
    
    
    

38. Finally, Vince, I’m tired of business being threatened in this state because the leaders of the business have a political opinion. .............

    Could you point me to your rule book where the !st amendment has been obliterated?

    Here’s the kind of stuff that I have seen posted on so called “Conservative” blogs Kevin.

    Just like the recall employees/volunteers, everyone who signs a recall petition is signing a public document. I’ll be looking at those names and making them public - especially for people in my neck of the woods. If you sign the petition and happen to own or run a local business, you can expect me to publicize that fact and decline to spend any more of my hard earned dollars with your establishment.

    Sounds like threatening intimidation and boycotting to me.

    How about you?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 1925 hrs
    
    
    

39. Fact or Opinion,

    The difference is:  I would denounce that tactic of boycotting WI business.

    Will you denounce the coordinated union threats and boycotts against Johnsonville, Kwik-Trip, Sargento, and other WI business?

    While I would not engage in that kind of tactic, few union leaders, if any, denounced those kind of tactics when the union was doing them, and now it has become the political standard.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 1942 hrs
    
    
    

40. The difference is:  I would denounce that tactic of boycotting WI business.

    Here’s your chance Kevin:)

    A Conservative’s Response to the Recall Drive

    It’s #2 on Owen’s list.

     

     

     

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2001 hrs
    
    
    

41. So I’m required to agree with Owen on everything? 

    I don’t agree with that tactic.  Personally, I think Owen is wrong on that one.  I understand why he feels its alright because he’s simply adopting the Saul A. union tactic of “by any means neccessary”.

    So now you consider it wrong when the union is not the one using the tactic?

    I see we are again losing site of the real issue:  Where was the union leader denouciation of this tactic last year?

    I’m still waiting for the union apology for their attack on Wisconsin business, jobs, and average taxpayers with their boycotts last year.

    Will you and “Fact or Opinion” apologize for what the union did last year and denounce it?

    I’m waiting….

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2027 hrs
    
    
    

42. 41.So I’m required to agree with Owen on everything?

    Who said you did?

    I don’t agree with that tactic.  Personally, I think Owen is wrong on that one.  I understand why he feels its alright because he’s simply adopting the Saul A. union tactic of “by any means neccessary”.

    WOW! That’s what I call a searing denouncement?

    Why do I have to apologize for anything from the Left or the Right.

    I am increasingly happy to be an independent. You should try it some time.

    And this homogenous “we have to be unprincipled assholes because they are” approach from both sides vacillates between humorous and pathetic.

    Your response was an exceptional blending of the two.

     

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2102 hrs
    
    
    

43. I said I denounced this tactic.  Disagree with the tactic and said Owen was wrong.

    How much stronger do you want it? 

    If you are an “independent”, why does Owen only draw your ire on this tactic?  Why not the unions?

    Hardly a sign of being an “independent” in my opinion.

    Based on your disdain for Owen and your “independent” affiliation, it should be no problem for you to also denounce the unions using this hateful tactic.

    I don’t think you are an “independent” because you will not denounce the unions doing this to WI business.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2115 hrs
    
    
    

44. If you are an “independent”, why does Owen only draw your ire on this tactic?  Why not the unions?

    IRE? Kevin what are you talking about.

    I quoted Owen and provided a link to the post so it could be appreciated in its full context.

    I gave my impression and asked you yours.

    I said that it “Sounds like threatening intimidation and boycotting to me.”

    You are the one talking about denouncements.

    That “fer us or agin us” perspective is all yours as well.

    Enjoy it.

    Good Night!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2136 hrs
    
    
    

45. When you accuse someone of “threatening” and “intimidating”, that is not drawing your ire?

    It certainly looks like ire to me.  You took time to call Owen out on it.

    I probably should not hold my breathe waiting for you to say the unions were wrong using this tactic…

    Don’t make claim you are an “independent”, when you are not.  Its clear you will not talk about union intimidation and threats.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2012 at 2150 hrs
    
    
    

46. Kevin,

    Please answer—To take it upon yourself to contact people in your municipality to verify that they signed.  What will you do if you find that everyone you contacted did sign?  Will you post a list of their names so that they can be further contacted by others?

    And if you actually took the time to read what I said, I have no problem with people who support Walker—I shop at some of their businesses.  I have a problem with you deciding you will police the petition process to make sure that people who signed really signed.  In my opinion, that is harassment.

    It is the same reason I no longer patronize Shell South in West Bend.  The owner told those holding recall signs he was a small businessman not on either side.  He then went inside and told his employees not to serve any of the sign holders.  He lied to make himself look like he was being victimized.

    Again, I find it interesting that you will waste time trying to verify who signed.  Wouldn’t your time be better spent helping and volunteering in your community to make it a better place for all to live?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 0644 hrs
    
    
    

47. 45.When you accuse someone of “threatening” and “intimidating”, that is not drawing your ire?

    Nope. I said it sounded threatening and intimidating. I felt neither.

    Hence no ire.

    It certainly looks like ire to me.  You took time to call Owen out on it.

    Incorrect! I was calling you out Kevin on your comments to vince.

    You haven’t fared very well.

    I may not agree with Owen on many things but I do respect him for standing on his own two feet when he offers his opinion instead of whimpering about somebody making him do something.

    Embargos and boycotts have probably been around as a tool used to influence behavior for as long humans as have engaged in trade.

    Your labeling this as an Alinsky/union thing just betrays the shallowness of your perspective.

    FTR, I think that while you can sometimes shoot yourself in the foot with it, voting with your pocketbook is a legitimate tool in attempting to actuate a desired response/outcome.

    Get it?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 0747 hrs
    
    
    

48. Vince,

    I’ve come across 10 names in 24,000 pages listed in the village.

    2 are not Village residents.  1 of those 2, I have serious concerns whether its a real person, given the Village address is FAKE, non-existent.

    7 of 10 are registered, and did vote in 2010. 

    Reviewing the petitions, and checking into suspect signatures, is every citizen’s right.  It’s a public petition.

    So far, I only attempted to speak with an alleged constituent at the non-existent address to see if he was real.  Well, the address does not exist and I took pictures where the street ends, where the alleged house should be.

    Is finding this kind of issue a problem?

    So its clear not everyone on this petition is a real person.  I’d like to know how many “non-resident” constituents I have to court in my Village for the next Village Board election.  I don’t consider that a waste of time.  I’m also looking for duplicates.  15% of the Van W. petition is duplicates. 

    And I do volunteer in Kewaskum.  I’m longtime member of Kewaskum Kiwanis (2-time President, 5-time treasurer of the club) and serve as longtime treasurer of my church, among many other volunteer activities in my church.    Would you like to help?  You are invited to Kiwanis tonight at 6 P.M. at the Old Hotel as my guest.  I’d love to have a talk about how both of us can get more active in Kewaskum’s civic activities.

    I did like your Shell story.  Its very enlightening.  Are you saying business owners cannot be “victims”?  If not, do I have stories for you!

    Fact or Fiction,

    If reviewing a petition, driving through the Village to see if suspect addresses are real,  and possibly talking with some constituents about it is “shooting yourself in the foot”... under that scenario, no politician, ever, should take a direct interest in a constituent petition?

    Wow.  Just when can someone take an interest in a public petition?

    I thought this is what the signers wanted, public officials to pay attention?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 0927 hrs
    
    
    

49. Try to focus Kevin.

    My comments are related to this.

    Finally, Vince, I’m tired of business being threatened in this state because the leaders of the business have a political opinion.  If you are going to say a local public official cannot take a direct interest in a constituent petition for reddress of grievance, talk with some constituents about the grievance….then God help our Democracy.

    Could you point me to your rule book where the !st amendment has been obliterated?

    And this.

    The difference is:  I would denounce that tactic of boycotting WI business.

    I am not, nor have I ever inferred, denouncing either vince or Owen for advocating the tactic of boycotting.

    That’s your initiative.

    I’m just fine with individuals or groups using boycotts as a tool to get their message across.

    The “shooting yourself in the foot” bit refers to the boycotter not the not the target of the boycott and certainly not you.

    I’ve plowed through 13,000 pages in 2 days and results are interesting so far.

    That’s impressive. How many total man hours is that?

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 0952 hrs
    
    
    

50. Fact or Opinion,

    This is where you are wrong!  The union boycott was directed at me!

    I’m a franchisee director for my national franchisee association and worked hard to get Sargento brand cheese products (made in Plymouth, WI) approved about 6-7 years ago.  Sargento has been an excellent partner not just for me, but for franchisee outlets across the the nation in our system using WI cheese!

    The union was abusing Sargento and putting this relationship in danger.  The Union attack could have reduced Sargento’s competitive pricing and possibly destroyed the partnership.

    I, personally, worked hard to get this partnership done so WI cheese is being used across the nation in my restaurant system.

    When I’m a target, for helping to create jobs for Wisconsin residents, especially so close to home, I don’t like it when someone attempts to undermine WI families in that manner.

    Had the Unions won in destroying just this one Sargento partnership (among many others Sargento has), the damage to WI would have been difficult to repair.

    When a business partner of mine is attacked, when private sector jobs of WI families are attacked, I am attacked.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1003 hrs
    
    
    

51. If reviewing a petition, driving through the Village to see if suspect addresses are real,  and possibly talking with some constituents

    If some guy drove up to my house, questioned me about how I’ve voted, petitions I’ve signed, I would not be a happy camper.

    Do my best to see that the Nosy Parker is unhappy, as well.  Starting with booting his raggedy ass off my land.

    Posted by Brian Dunbar on February 06, 2012 at 1008 hrs
    
    
    

52. Brian,

    That must be the new civility Obama is talking about.

    No one is asking you how you voted. 

    You have every right with anyone that knocks on your door to dis-invite them off your property.  I’ve done this to liberal school board candidates myself, whose positions constantly harass me for higher taxes.

    So we agree.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1016 hrs
    
    
    

53. The union boycott was directed at me!

    It was directed at supporters of Walker. Sargento and yourself chose to put yourselves in that camp.

    Owen is directing his boycott at the businesses who chose to place themselves on the other side of the coin.

    No difference and the result of the freedom to choose.

    You don’t like choice?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1030 hrs
    
    
    

54. I like choice.

    That’s why I’m puzzled why choosing to talk with my constituents, about a public petition, raises such a fuss.

    If we are going to declare union boycotts are not “harassing” or “intimidating” to political positions, then me having a chat with someone, simply asking if they actually signed a petition, is a big nothing by comparison.  I’m not asking or demanding anyone to “take it back” or change their position, unlike what THE UNIONS WERE DOING! 

    Thank you for making my point.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1039 hrs
    
    
    

55. My only point is that to track someone down to ask if they signed the petition assumes fraud.  It assumes that you need to verify they really signed.  I would find it highly offensive if you showed up on my door to ask if I really signed.  I feel it is intimidation based on the enviornment that exists.  And again, once you create a list of those in Kewaskum who signed, what will you do with it?

    As to my point about the Shell station and your business, the actions of the Shell Station owner were dishonest.  He told those collecting signatures one thing and his employees another.  I have always made a choice not to spend my money with a business owner who demonstrates dishonesty.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1051 hrs
    
    
    

56. That’s why I’m puzzled why choosing to talk with my constituents, about a public petition, raises such a fuss.

    Aw shucks, is that all?

    I suggest you reread your comments.

    The recall is about to become moot.

    Gallo does deals.

    It is going to be interesting who or what Scotty has to offer.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1058 hrs
    
    
    

57. Vince,

    If one is registered to vote in the village, and signed, I really have no need to ask, I assume its good.  (Unless I know the person and I know they would not sign, I will ask them, if registered.)

    My concern is with the non-existent addresses and unregistered voters in the village.  The non-existent addresses will be forwarded to the proper authorities.  If the voter is unregistered, I’d like to meet with them, and relay how easy it is to register to vote in the Village.  There are local elections real soon in the village.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1130 hrs
    
    
    

58. Kevin,

    My big concern is that you stated you wanted to create a database of everyone in Kewaskum who signed.  Once created, what will you do with that information?

    And you seem to have changed your tune—earlier you stated that regarding unregistered voters you would

    “B.)  If legitimate address, check in with that person to confirm they signed.  If so, that’s fine.”

    That is very different that telling them how to register.

    The bottom line that you will never understand is that in the climate that exists in Washington County, anyone who visits a home or calls to verify that a petition has been signed will most likely feel that they are being targeted.  It is intimidating.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1151 hrs
    
    
    

59. Kevin,

    Keep up the good work. If my name turned up on the recall petition and I didn’t sign it, I’d sure want to know!!!!! And if I did sign, I’d be happy to know someone was there to verify it.

    The pissing and moaning by the lefties continues…............
    Don’t waste your time with them and hit the recall pages!!!!!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1154 hrs
    
    
    

60. Asking someone if they signed a petition is not intimidation.  As I clarified, if the voter is registered in the village, unless I know the registered voter to be a Scott Walker supporter, I will not be asking registered voters.

    I will be asking those unregistered in the Village and those at suspect addresses (if i can find the suspect address).  I’m against petition fraud in the village.  If the unregistered person, if they exist, does not want to talk with me, that is fine, i will leave. At least I will know they are a real person. 

    So when I was the target of Union massive intimidation via the Sargento boycott, that was OK?  Where was your outrage for me?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1203 hrs
    
    
    

61. Kevin,

    You do not understand.  You see asking someone as your right.  Many who are asked in the volatile climate that is Washington County will see it as intimidation.  You will never understand that.

    And again, what are you going to do with the list you create?  You have repeatedly failed to answer that—yes you will verify, but after that, what happens to your list?  Who gets to see it and for what purpose????

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1232 hrs
    
    
    

62. Ah, Vince…up to the old harassment tactics. Must be a familial thing.

    So you SAY the Shell station dissed you.  We should take your word?

    I don’t really think anyone cares who you patronize.  Really, Vince.  I don’t.

    Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 06, 2012 at 1333 hrs
    
    
    

63. Vince,

    When you answer the very same questions abut the Union boycotts, I’ll oblige your questions.

    Would it make it OK if I promise not to go outside the standards of treatment the Union reserves for people the Union disagrees with?

    That should be a standard that should satisfy your concern and equitable for all.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1602 hrs
    
    
    

64. Kevin, read before you post.  There is no question about Union boycotts and creating lists.

    All I want to know is what you will do with your list once it is created.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1647 hrs
    
    
    

65. Vince,

    Answer:  I wouldn’t do anything that the Union would not do.

    (In reality, I’m much more nice.  I’m going to forward signatures that are a fraud to proper authorities and merely compile statistics on legitimate signatures from the Village in terms of registration and whether they voted for gov. in 2010.  I had no plans on doing anything with the individual names.)

    When will you take the same interest in the Union running around with Scott Walker campaign finance reports shouting those names from the hilltops in an effort to punish and intimidate Scott Walker donors with a political opinion?

    I find your interest in this matter very discrimatory vs. what the Unions were doing.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1703 hrs
    
    
    

66. Kevin,I see you didn’t take my advice.

    I think you are trying to wear to many hats on what from all indications must be a rather small head.

    Public official, would be Walker campaign operative, business owner, dunce.

    Did I miss anything?

    Here’s what you woould like us to believe

    That’s why I’m puzzled why choosing to talk with my constituents, about a public petition, raises such a fuss.

    Sounds reasonable but then this;

    So when I was the target of Union massive intimidation via the Sargento boycott, that was OK?  Where was your outrage for me?

    And this;

    When you answer the very same questions abut the Union boycotts, I’ll oblige your questions.

    Guess what Kev, as much as you want it to be, this ain’t about you.

    Sounds like you are more interested in getting even than doing the right thing.

    I think there is a big union rally coming up in Madison soon, maybe you could stop in and chat with the union folks about your grievances with them.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1810 hrs
    
    
    

67. Kevin,

    I am done writing—you only respond to what you think someone says without really taking the time to understand.

    As to the Union lists you mention, the Unions did not compile the lists of Walker contributors.  They use what Walker is compelled by the law to put together.  And this list tells me who gave Walker money and how much.  I can do whatever I want or do not want to do with the information.

    You are creating a list that will not exist elsewhere for the expressed purpose—and you have repeatedly stated this—of listing every person in your Village who signed the recall petition.  This list will not exist anywhere else.  You are creating it for your use.  Your list and the Union list are two completely different things.  The Union list is mandated by law to be public information.  Your list is being created to show who signed a recall petition.  So the question of how you will use it is valid—it has nothing to do with how Unions use the lists they get that are created by others.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2012 at 1919 hrs
    
    
    

68. Vince and Fact or Opinion, you guys crack me up.

    The union can do whatever it wants when it makes a list.  Boycott, intimidate, punish, harass, destroy jobs, and demand people change political positions by threat.  That is “democracy” in the union culture.

    If taxpayers, allegedly, make a list the Union doesn’t like, that’s labeled “intimidation” vs “democracy”.

    I was, in reality, only compiling statistics and checking suspect signatures, but now that union defenders (while protecting the union doing the same thing) are demanding I can’t do something…

     

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 07, 2012 at 0733 hrs
    
    
    

69. Wow vince… wow

    You are creating a list that will not exist elsewhere for the expressed purpose—and you have repeatedly stated this—of listing every person in your Village who signed the recall petition.  This list will not exist anywhere else.  You are creating it for your use.  Your list and the Union list are two completely different things.  The Union list is mandated by law to be public information.  Your list is being created to show who signed a recall petition.  So the question of how you will use it is valid—it has nothing to do with how Unions use the lists they get that are created by others.

    He is not creating a list, he is not publishing anything that is not already published.  It’s public information.  WOW - how do you tie your shoes in the morning?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 07, 2012 at 1855 hrs
    
    
    

70. Through 35,000 pages.  A lot of interesting data for Village of Kewaskum.  Big gender skew so far. favoring female signers.  A lot more unregistered voters than I expected also. 

    Found 1 page circulated by Bret.  Great News for him.  I could not find one flaw, despite stopping and spending some time on that page.  I admit, as a long experienced petition circulator, he passed the toughest scrutiny I could muster on that page!  Fairly good handwriting also.  Looks like the recall movement has at least 10 good signatures, thanks to Bret.

    A few West Bend residents were dispersed through first 35,000 pages, but a large chunk of West Bend petitions reside in these links for anyne in West Bend looking:

    http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 34301-34350.pdf

    http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 34351-34400.pdf

    http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 34401-34450.pdf

    http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 34251-34300.pdf

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 09, 2012 at 2148 hrs
    
    
    

71. Thanks for the links.  Looked through them.  Not really that many WB signatures.  Saw a few familiar names, i.e., Paul Rice, Kris Beaver, but nothing surprising.

    Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 09, 2012 at 2229 hrs
    
    
    

72. I hope that all the detractors reading through the names of over a million patriots and statesmen become aware of the historic significance of the good peoples’ work. It is past time that we stand together and take back our great state!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2012 at 1632 hrs
    
    
    

73. Bret,

    Are you sure there is a million signatures?

    I took a number sampling of 1000 pages and the average number of signatures per page is around 5.7 signatures. (Just raw counting signatures, only excluding blank lines, so I counted obvious invalid signatures in sampling as well.) At 150,000 pages, that is around 800,000-900,000 signatures. 

    Some petition formats are just a mail-in 1 signature style and GAB counts that as 1 page. (about 10% of the time)  Many are only a 5-line format, about 30-35% of the time, which brings average down per page from 10-line format.  Many 10-line petitions have only 1 or 2 signatures on them.  To get to 1 million, the petitions need to average about 7 “sigs” a page.  I just don’t see how the math works with these “unique” 1-line and 5-line petition formats being counted as a page among the submitted 153,000 pages .  There are also numerous pages assigned a number, but blank labeled “Not submitted”.  I surmise the GAB threw those out already for obvious problems, so those pages, which I estimate in the thousands each have ZERO valid signatures on them.  These “not submitted designations also help explain why per page average is only 5.7 in my sample.  Many think these petitions all have the 10-line format.  They don’t.  This ignores duplicate signatures, which I see quite a few of.  Assembly Rep. Jeff Stone took testimony this week that one of the recall petition groups encouraged people to sign 2 or 3 times in case their signature got thrown out.

    How many will there be when we take out duplicates?  I know for sure there will be signatures struck off in the Village.

    I’m at page 47,000.  I’ve verified one non-existent address in village, I also found several other addresses claimed to be in Village that are not.  There are several suspect addresses I’m going to drive to try and find them.

    At page 47,000, I’m more energized than ever.  Its clear there are a lot of problems with people claiming to live in the village (when they do not) and it needs to be documented in great detail. 

    The State has been taken back BTW.  Local governments, not the unions, are now in control again.  All one has to do is look at the mega money governments save on getting away from WEAC health ins!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2012 at 1655 hrs
    
    
    

74. http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 63501-63550.pdf

    WOW!

    In first 60,000 pages there are periodic “not submitted” pages (meaning ZERO signatures submitted for that page #, for my progressive friends).  There are even blocks of 5-10 pages occasionally, “not submitted”.

    This block of 50 pages has 38 pages “not submitted”!

    I wonder what happened.

    Are we sure there is a million signatures????

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 0954 hrs
    
    
    

75. Check out page #71410 and #71426.

    http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 71401-71450.pdf

    The Sisters in the Retirement home for Catholic Nuns all have same handwriting.  (with possible exception of slot #3 on #71410, and slot #1 on #71426).

    I don’t like it when Nuns are taken advantage of.

    For any enterprising news reporter, take a visit to the Campbellsport retirement home for Catholic nuns and ask if they signed this petition.

    It must be one heck of a handwriting class they put on to get all the Sisters to sign the exact same way.  I’d love to have each of them show me how they learn to get their handwriting so close.

    wow!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1658 hrs
    
    
    

76. The Sisters in the Retirement home for Catholic Nuns all have same handwriting.

    Are you saying that the signatures are all the exact same handwriting?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1715 hrs
    
    
    

77. I’m saying on page #74410, 9 of 10 signatures look like the same handwriting.

    And slot #2 and #3 on page #74426 look like the handwriting on 9 of the slots on page #74410.

    Have you looked at the pages?  I’ve come across a lot of pages that look like one handwriting, or similar handwriting, and moved on.  However, even a handwriting layman can tell the slots identified are the same handwriting.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1736 hrs
    
    
    

78. Apologize, post #77 should be page #71410 and page #71426, respectively at issue.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1738 hrs
    
    
    

79. Have you looked at the pages?

    Yup

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1751 hrs
    
    
    
80. The Sisters in the Retirement home for Catholic Nuns all have same handwriting. 

    Didn’t go to Catholic school, did you?

    Sorry to tell you, but A. I don’t think those signatures look identical and B. it’s not surprising at all that Catholic Nuns would have very similar signatures. Penmanship was a required part of their education & proper formation of the letters to was drilled to very rigid standards.

    My mom and her sisters’ (biological sisters that is) handwriting all looks ever bit as similar to each other as these nun’s signatures are.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 1921 hrs
    
    
    

81. Wow.

    As someone who has personally gathered 25,000+ pages of petitions in his life and reviewed 70,000+ pages of Gov. Recall petitions…THERE IS NO WAY THE SIGNATURES ON PAGE #71410 ARE FROM 10 DIFFERENT PEOPLE!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2021 hrs
    
    
    

82. Pat, Locke,

    It might interest you to know, that I HAVE petitioned, as a circulator, at that particular convent…when Glenn Grothman was running for State Senate against Mary Panzer…and no one at that convent in Campbellsport had signatures that could even be called similar.

    What may have been my issue, and silly me, is:  I only allowed each person to sign once.

    Probably explains why I did not get similar signatures on my petitions!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2029 hrs
    
    
    

83. It might interest you to know, that I HAVE petitioned, as a circulator, at that particular convent…when Glenn Grothman was running for State Senate against Mary Panzer…and no one at that convent in Campbellsport had signatures that could even be called similar.

    Well there you have it.  We’ve got the indisputable proof we’ve all been waiting for.  Besides being a successful fast food merchandiser you’ve been a circulator of petitions making you a hand writing expert.  There’s absolutely no reason to doubt your credentials as a hand writing expert now. Case closed.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2100 hrs
    
    
    

84. There are very few people in Wisconsin with as much petition expertise as I have accumulated the past 20 years.

    I challenge anyone to gather 10 signatures from 10 DIFFERENT people that look even close to each other like this.

    It’s impossible.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2110 hrs
    
    
    

85. Kevin,

    If you are so concerned why don’t you just drive up to the convent and ask the sisters.  You are doing it in Kewaskum according to your posts.  It is a short trip.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2130 hrs
    
    
    

86. I might just do that.

    I enjoyed my visit the last time I was there.  They struck me as a very conservative bunch.  Their life experience always makes the Sisters a fun bunch to talk to.  (At least in my opinion…they aren’t afraid to talk about Jesus in regular conversation.)

    For now, I’m going to finish my statistical gathering on the signers that claim to live in the Village of Kewaskum.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2143 hrs
    
    
    

87. Kevin,

    If you were truly concerned about the integrity of the recall process, you would not hesitate to go to the convent—“I might just do that” suggests you may or may not.

    I think all you are trying do is to stir up trouble and cast doubt on a process that is relatively error free.  Typical Tea Party trouble maker—you are trying to create a controversy where the only one that exists is in your narrow, closed mind.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2152 hrs
    
    
    

88. It’s a matter of time.

    I’d like to complete my report on the signers in the Village first, which I think will be far more interesting that these 2 pages of signatures.

    I didn’t realize a reasonable amount of scrutiny of these petitions is “stirring up trouble”.

    “Stirring up trouble” is progressive activists threatening to kill, hurt, or actually harassing, by shouting,swearing, and putting a bullhorn in people’s faces. (The union protestors at the car dealer in Janesville-Beloit area this last weekend raising money for veteran causes!)  Including incidents of pouring beer over the heads of state legislators.  Did you see the threats Koch industries released this week from progressive activists?  Awful. Just awful, considering they are a big employer in WI.

    So when you give me a “closed mind” lecture, when all I’m doing is pointing out interesting petition signatures,could you reflect on yourself and what the progressive movement has done by comparison when you use the term “stirring up trouble”?

    Thanks for gut busting laugh on that one!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2205 hrs
    
    
    

89. Kevin,

    Reasonable amount of scrutiny is ok.  What you are doing is pathological and way over any normal edge of sanity.  Finding everyone in Kewaskum who signed and then contacting them to verify that they really signed is bordering on psychopathic behavior.  It assumes that people really would not sign.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2012 at 2209 hrs
    
    
    

90. Sarah,

    You just continue to amuse.

    I’m not asking everyone.  I will ask those who are registered to vote and I KNOW to be Walker supporters.  I will be checking on the unregistered voters in the Village, WHO DID SIGN, and did not vote for gov. in 2010.

    Along with checking the unregistered voters, I will be driving the Village, and have already driven, some of the suspect addresses listed in the Village.

    I will also be checking to see how many of these unregistered voters, who did sign, who do actually reside in the village,  and did not vote for gov in 2010 in Village, but then fail to register and vote in today’s school board primary.

    I think all of that will be very interesting in terms of statistical gathering.

    And Sarah,

    I missed your “pathological” denouncement with the union supporters with the bullhorn at the car dealership last week, disrupting an event for vets, swearing, and scaring elderly citizens attending the event.

    I missed your “Pathological” denouncement of all the progressive union supporters threatening, intimidating, swearing, and harassing or state legislators day in and day out.

    I missed your “Pathological” denouncement of all the progressive union supporters protesting, disturbing, and harassing Scott Walker’s family outside his house.

    I missed your “Pathological” denouncement of all the progressive union supporters protesting, disturbing, and harassing and defending the pink dress guy in Madison, who has been arrested too many times to count for his thuggish behavior.

    If this is what it has come to…you excuse all of the above behavior… and I cannot look at, and sometimes criticize, the petitions submitted by the people in the movement I just described, our democracy is truly dead.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0731 hrs
    
    
    

91. Kevin,

    If democracy is dead it is because narrow, close minded fanatics like you have killed it.  Who made you the recall police?  Your assumption in doing what you say you will do, is that people would not sign a recall position.  In saying that you will target those not on the voter registration lists, you are harassing those people.  If I were not a registered voter in a Tea Party area like yours and someone who was a known Tea Party activist came to my door to verify that I signed a recall petition, I would not feel comfortable voting.  I would feel that I am being watched and judged.

    You will never get it.  You mind is so closed and so narrow that it cannot possibly fathom an opinion different from yours.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0740 hrs
    
    
    

92. And BTW Kevin,

    I find it quite amusing that you feel a liberal blog like Motley Cow censors—your word—when it screens comments and does not let yours or other conservatives comments be posted.  Yet, when a conservative blog like WISSUP does the same thing to liberals, you cannot say a bad thing about it because it publishes your comments.

    I also find it amusing that when you are challenged about your beliefs and tactics you have no self-reflection.  Any challenge to you or your beliefs is directed back against the one challenging you or, most often, against unions.  I have never belonged to a union and will most likely never belong to a union, yet when I point out your pathological behavior, all you can do is tell me how pathological the unions are.  What about you?  Because as we all know, it is all about you!!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0814 hrs
    
    
    

93. Sarah,

    On the contrary.  I don’t want it to be all about me.

    That’s why I take the tactic I do. 

    In my experience, progressives rarely want to meet on the field of dealing with the issue on an intellectual level, the tendency is to, instead, call someone names like “pathological”, “Tea Bagger”, etc.

    In this case, you do not like the idea of pointing out legitimate problems with the recall petitions.  When those problems cannot be explained away on an intellectual level, progressives will attack and discredit by trying to demonize me.

    In return, I just point out the illegal and thuggish behavior of progressives to destroy the demonization argument against me.

    I’m a little shocked how offended progressives get just pointing random petition stuff out on the fly.  I guess I’ll have to get ready for the massive name calling when I disclose the addresses NOT actually in the Village of Kewaskum on the recall petitions, but marked as being in the Village of Kewaskum.

     

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0847 hrs
    
    
    

94. You will never get it.  You mind is so closed and so narrow that it cannot possibly fathom an opinion different from yours.

    Just from your 4 posts in this discussion I know that you are speaking from experience.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0900 hrs
    
    
    

95. Kevin,

    Me thinks you doth protest too much.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0920 hrs
    
    
    

96. Sarah,

    LOL!

    After the union protesting last year, there is no such thing as “protest(ing) too much.”

    I get it now.  You think unions can protest, no matter how illegal, disruptive, and rude.  Tea Party taxpayers are supposed to sit still, not say anything, and assume the position for shakedown.

    I have to apologize, I’m still trying to articulate the doctrinal position of the disciples progressive political religion.  If you could forward those religious positions to me, I’ll promise to take extra effort, in the future, to really offend those anti-democracy positions.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0934 hrs
    
    
    

97. Kevin,

    You really do not understand sarcasm.  My comment means that you spend so much time defending your position and actions by pointing out what the other—in this case me and the unions does—that you fail to reflect on your own issues.  It seems that you try to deflect to others issues to avoid your own.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 0941 hrs
    
    
    

98. Anyone have the petition numbers for West Bend?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2012 at 2258 hrs
    
    
    

99. Sarah said

      cast doubt on a process that is relatively error free

    
    Are you serious?  We have a good idea that when all is said and done we will be looking at between 5% and 20% error or outright fraud.  How many elections would those kind of numbers be able to swing?  How many have they swung?  I know, I know - you are probably going to say that the left normally isn’t this corrupt - only when it is really important to them.

    Kevin is doing yeoman’s work.  We need to understand how corrupt the left is willing to be on this to understand the scope of the problem.  Kevin is only verifying how much the people in his community were defrauded.  Everyone who legitimately signed the petition did so publicly and with no expectation of anonymity.

    Error free - good one.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0544 hrs
    
    
    

100. William,

     I’ve been stopping and looking at West Bend petitions, mainly who signed and who circulated.  I have not been tracking WB signatures or compiling statistics on them.  I can give you the approx. page spots where most of West Bend Petitions reside.  They are , mostly in 3 clusters, although scattered here and there throughout.

     Its no surprise that the leaders of having very adult library material in front of children are some of the big leaders in the hate Scott Walker movement.

     Our resident UWWC philosophy professor claimed he was actually working in the Recall petition coal mine on UWWC campus.  He made a big deal over an alleged Tea Partier telling him he couldn’t do that on campus.  I wanted to see if he could gather and complete a petition properly.  I have my doubts he can do that.  Still have not found one circulated by him.

     I’m anxious to congratulate him if he completed one properly.

     
     If someone would go over WB petitions with City’s registered voter list,  track the non-registered voters who signed and did not vote for gov. in 2010, the suspect addresses become readily obvious with help of google.

     One thing that shocks on these petitions:  many of Recall Walker signers, literally, have a problem figuring out the municipality in which they live.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0701 hrs
     
     
     

101. Kevin,

     Glad to see you are now trying to direct things in West Bend.  2 questions for you—you have not answered multiple questions about why Motley Cow is censorship and WISSUP is not when neither posts dissenting opinions—I suspect you are intellectually incapable of making that distinction due to your closed mind.  And, when you drive to the convent and find out that all of the sisters did sign, will you be man enough to apologize to them?

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0713 hrs
     
     
     

102. Sarah,

     I have not experienced the issue you claim on WISSUP. 

     If the nuns did not sign, I think they would be thankful someone pointed that out.

     If nuns did sign, I’d sure love to talk to them about recalling Walker to face Kathleen Falk.

     Kathleen Falk in the tradition of the progressive religion:

     1.)  Supports expelling Christ from the public square.  From what I understand, she has been very supportive of the positions of the Freedom From Religion foundation on this.

     2.)  Supports getting rid of school vouchers, especially those vouchers that allow kids to get a Christ centered education.

     3.)  Supports killing unborn children.

     4.) Supports a Democratic Party, that right now, through Obamacare, wants to tell Catholics how to practice their religion.  Violating the establishment clause in the 1st Amendment.  (Note for those of you against school vouchers for Christian Schools…seems like we have tossed the establishment clause and “separation of church and state” asunder anyway with Obama.)

     I’d sure love to have a talk with the nuns how their recall signature supports Christ, and his kingdom, on those issues.  Many of our friends on the progressive side, responsible for this recall, are overtly hostile[/strong] to Christianity and Christ.

     So it is very curious why nuns, that are faithful to Christ, would do such a thing, or support the idea of replacing the current gov. with someone who believes those 4 things.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0810 hrs
     
     
     

103. Kevin,

     You are no longer worth responding to.  You need ears to listen and obviously you do not have any.

     Admit it—if WISSUP does not allow dissenting voices, it censors.  Just because you have not experienced it does not mean it is not true.  Search WISSUP for dissenting opinions.  There are far more on Motley Cow than WISSUP.

     I have never experienced a good meal—good tasting, well prepared and a good value—at your restaurant—therefore based on your logic above—your restaurant does not provide good meals.

     Good Day

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0844 hrs
     
     
     

104. Sarah,

     I take the Saul A. tactic on the WISSUP issue.  Is that a problem?

     Progressives use those tactics all the time in relation to their behavior.  So now its a problem when I use the same tactic for the TEA Party team?

     We sure did stop talking about the nuns in a hurry, based on my last post.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0855 hrs
     
     
     

105. @Sarah:  Read Rule #5:  http://wissup.blogspot.com/2009/08/now-noweverybody-breatheand-read.html

     Better yet, read them all.  Then return to the topic of the post, please.  I’m sure everyone is tired of hearing you rant about WISSUP.  I am.

     Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 22, 2012 at 0928 hrs
     
     
     

106. Ginny,

     No rant—just pointing out that you censor dissenting opinions on a regular basis.  I rarely see posts from people who disagree with your narrow-minded hatefilled posts.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 0931 hrs
     
     
     

107. just pointing out that you censor

     No, she doesn’t.  Only a government can censor.

     Posted by Brian Dunbar on February 22, 2012 at 0940 hrs
     
     
     

108. As stated in my “rules.” your First Amendment rights do not apply on my blog.  My blog, my rules.  Like or lump it.  I won’t take up any more of Owen’s bandwidth on this ridiculous banter. Stick to the post topic, like a good girl.

     Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 22, 2012 at 0950 hrs
     
     
     

109. Ginny,

     The only reason your blog came up was because Kevin accused Mark Peterson of censorship on Motley Cow.  Others pointed out that you do exactly the same thing on your blog—so, if what Mark does is censorship, then what you do is the same.

     And you are a condescending woman.  Calling me a good girl.  You know nothing about me and have no right to take that condescending tone with me.  Why don’t you tell me to stay home, get pregnant and go barefoot?

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1007 hrs
     
     
     

110. I’m tempted. 

     Posted by Ginny Maziarka on February 22, 2012 at 1011 hrs
     
     
     

111. Sarah, Can you please provide a link to your blog site.
     -Thanks,

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1014 hrs
     
     
     

112. Taxtothemax!

     Don’t have a blog site.  Just pointing out the hypocrisy Kevin demonstrated.

     Ginny,

     The fact that you respond to a serious concern that I raise about your post with a winky face shows you for what you are—a bully.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1022 hrs
     
     
     

113. Ok,

     We were just wondering, considering the mass and volume of your opinion on how to run one.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1030 hrs
     
     
     

114. Taxtothemax,

     I am not making comments on how to run a blog.  I am just pointing out that Kevin has a double standard and cannot acknowledge that.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1102 hrs
     
     
     

115. Sarah,

     Typical Saul A. tactics.  You want to take focus off my statistical gathering on the recall petitions…especially shining light on the number of unregistered voters who signed to try an undue my Walker vote in 2010, who may not have even bothered to vote for gov. in 2010.  As well as shining the light on the suspect address entries on the petition for those claiming to be in village of Kewaskum.

     You instead, want to focus on me not criticizing some blog I’ve never had a problem with.  Talk about a classic Red Herring.  If we are going to stick to that Saul A. standard you are setting here…let’s use the hyper-sensitive Saul A. tactic standard for recall signers!  I sure got some heavy criticism for the people that signed that have no clue where they live!  (Ergo, should they even be making decisions to undue an election?)

     Remember, you said it was not about me…but you insist on making it about me because you cannot win the intellectual argument on the issues I point out on the recall petitions.  When will you acknowledge this double standard?

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2012 at 1131 hrs
     
     
     

116. Interesting recall petitions:

     #89932.    slot 6,7,8.

     http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 89901-89950.pdf

     Ernest Mongomery Sr. and Ernest Montgomery Jr. have the same signature.  So does Angela Montgomery.

     Magaret Erkins printing in slot #9 looks like that of the Montgomery clan.
     ____________________

     Another old age home, this time Cedar Ridge in West Bend, with remarkably similar signatures by its residents:

     #87919

     http://webapps.wi.gov/sites/recall/Recall Petitions/Governor/GOV 87901-87950.pdf

     If you visit the Cedar Ridge page, go 4 pages further to #87923 and you can find our resident Motely Cow blogger’s signature. (Barring that there is not ANOTHER “progressive” Mark Peterson in West Bend.)  I’m fascinatedd he is not his own ciruclator.  He posted on the Motely Cow he was harassed by a Tea Partier at UWWC working the recall petition coal mine.  I have not come across a petition yet circulated by him.  Did his signatures get thrown out by GAB?  Did he collect any?  Did the Tea Party incident even happen?    It will be fascinating whther or not he did collect signatures.

      

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 24, 2012 at 1308 hrs
     
     
     

117. Kevin,

     It would be fascinating if they did a MRI on you and found any normal brain activity!!!!  You have way too much time on your hands if you worry about what Mark is doing and saying.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 25, 2012 at 1037 hrs
     
     
     

118. Some more of those Saul A. tactics, to take attention off the real issue:  the suspicious recall petitions.

     I’m fascinated by Mark Peterson.  He advocates causes and idea that will leave us all begging and graveling to souless, faceless, government bureaucrats in Madison and DC for basic life needs, but complains, bitterly, when Madison pulls back support for his favorite “needs”:  the UWWC philosophy department.  (It seems socialism does not always work well for him.)

     He’s an interesting enigma.  He thinks the socialist disaster in Greece is to be ignored.  WI did not have a budget problem last year, and Illinois, which may be in worse shape than Greece, after massive tax increases last year is sound public policy.

     His failed Hugo Chavez-like ideas constantly need to be refuted.  That’s why he is interesting.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 25, 2012 at 1127 hrs
     
     
     

119. @ Kevin:

     There is 1 page MP circulated that I ran across #87901- about 5 pages in.  Circulated on 12/17.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 25, 2012 at 1146 hrs
     
     
     

120. Thanks,  I will check it out.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 25, 2012 at 1209 hrs
     
     
     

121. Looked at it.  He did not indicate “town” or “city” of West Bend in his certification.

     When the municipality of residence of circulator is unclear, there is sufficiency to challenge the entire petition.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 25, 2012 at 1213 hrs
     
     
     

122. “True the Vote”  is reporting that the counted raw signatures, after each one being entered 3+ times is 850,000 total signatures!

     If one looks at my post above, my sample of 1000 pages was about 5.7 signatures a page, or about 850,000!

     One million signatures?  Can we stop spreading the that lie now???  Will JS, TV stations, and other liberal media print a retraction on it? 

     So we are now down to 850,000 signatures once we strip the PR out. 

     Now onto challenging the invalid signatures.

     Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 27, 2012 at 0848 hrs