Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...


Everything but tech support.

0645, 26 Mar 19

The thumb on the scales

My column for the Washington County Daily News is in print and on line. Here’re the highlights, but be sure to pick up a copy to read the whole thing!

If there was any doubt as to the importance of the upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court election, the outrageous ruling by rogue Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess should vanquish it. The leftists have shown that they are willing to use the power of the judicial branch to advance their radical agenda without scruples or remorse. Against such an onslaught, a Supreme Court comprised of strict constitutionalists serves as the last bastion against the judicial usurpation of our representative government.


Judge Niess’ ruling was not based on law. It was based on advancing a liberal political outcome.

If you wondered what that outcome was, DemocratsGov. Tony Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul quickly confirmed it as they moved swiftly after the ruling to withdraw the state from the federal Obamacare lawsuit and begin the process of replacing the 82 people appointed by Gov. Scott Walker who were confirmed in that session.


Thankfully, Dane County Judge Niess’ ruling will likely be stayed by an appeals court this week before being completely overturned. If Dane County voters have any fidelity to the rule of law, Niess will be run off the bench for his blatant abuse of power. He is a disgrace.

The judicial system is designed to correct for rogue and incompetent judges by allowing bad decisions to be appealed through multiple higher courts. But if the same rabid partisanship that infects Judge Niess is permitted to spread to the Supreme Court, the Legislature and governor will be relegated to merely being entertaining political theater because the austere tyrants in black robes will make all of the real decisions.

Judge Niess, Governor Evers, and Attorney General Kaul tipped their hands to how they will neuter the power of the Republican-led Legislature if the radical leftists take control of the state Supreme Court. They will follow the path of the leftist horde after Governor Walker was elected. They will get a fellow traveler on the Dane County bench to rule laws they do not like as unconstitutional, and then act by judicial and executive fiat. Except this time, instead of the Supreme Court overturning bad rulings and showing deference to the Constitution and the tenets of representative government, a leftist-dominated court will set the leftist agenda into stone.

On April 2, or anytime this week via early voting, it is critically important that Wisconsin elect Judge Brian Hagedorn to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He has demonstrated the appropriate humility, firm adherence to the Constitution, and deference to representative government necessary to protect the individual rights of Wisconsinites. If the Supreme Court is to remain a bulwark for individual liberty and representative government, we need to elect justices like Brian Hagedorn who believe in those principles.


0645, 26 March 2019


  1. JordanBellante

    Mr. Robinson-

    My name is Jordan Bellante and I am incredibly invested in the well-being of our community and our political system. I initially read your contribution to the Daily News on March 26 and it was disheartening to say the least.

    In the contribution, you directly call the competence of the Honorable Judge Richard Niess into question. Judge Niess earned a professional law degree in 1978 and has been practicing law since then. I think it is in poor taste to call his competence into question. He has been a dedicated civil servant since 2004 and such service deserves a higher level of respect than that with which you wrote about him. A further look into his past reveals even more to consider him a dedicated citizen. He acted as president of a group dedicated to assisting the elderly and disabled which says a lot about his character. What you wrote about Niess however isn’t only disrespectful to him- it is disrespectful to the judicial institutions which ensure the separation of powers in our great nation.

    The way in which you blatantly attacked judges for being tyrants indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the way in which our judicial system functions. It seems that you understand the job of a judge, but you seem to lack an understanding of the nuances regarding the interpretation of the constitution, as well as the real authority which judges possess.

    While it is our responsibility to call elected officials into question for their decisions which impact our lives, there is a respectful way to do it. We need to keep in mind that these elected officials are civil servants; I don’t think that any elected official, liberal or conservative, wants to see our communities crumble, however the scare-tactics which you use in your letter seem to indicate that you think liberals are on a mission to destroy America. I sincerely hope that you take this into consideration when writing your next piece for the Daily News. When we unite, we succeed, and the article that you wrote for the March 26 publication of the Daily News seems to sow seeds of division rather than advocate for unity.


    Jordan Bellante.

  2. Kevin Scheunemann


    Owen should pipe down and stop calling out liberal evil.

    So tired of that liberal political correctness position.

    Sick of it actually.


  3. Pat

    It’s awful when someone, who eloquently makes a rebuttal to a conservatives opinion, is attacked with unsubstantiated accusations of intent. Awful, just awful.

  4. Kevin Scheunemann


    How is that a personal attack?

    Have you seen the personal attacks written toward me?

    I find it curious you call that out considering the really awful foaming personal attacks I have seen over the years here.

    That was hardly a tickle of criticism.

  5. JordanBellante

    Mr. Scheunemann,

    Suggesting that people with a more liberal ideology are evil is foolish- plain and simple. We have had both liberal and conservative administrations- both successful and less successful conservative and liberal administrations. Liberals and conservatives both want to make society better- they just fundamentally disagree on how to go about doing so. The late John McCain actually said something very similar to this when one of his supporters used ad-hominem criticisms of then presidential candidate Barack Obama.

    We should be able to have productive discussion regarding differences in opinion. We don’t need to be unruly to express criticism. That isn’t being politically correct- it’s human decency. I was brought up to respect everyone, regardless of whether or not they gave me respect. Public servants might disagree on how to get things done, but they are serving. Sure, there are some crooked politicians- we should be skeptical of anyone who solicits our vote; but that doesn’t mean that we should directly disrespect them and our institutions.

    I never said that Mr. Robinson should stop criticizing liberal public officials. In fact, it is his right to do so, and I encourage anyone to question their elected officials.


    Mr. Robinson levied accusations of tyranny against judges who dedicate their lives to public service, and that is fundamentally wrong.

    Your “translation” of my message is wrong, and I encourage you to openly discuss any legitimate criticisms that you have of it.


    Jordan Bellante

  6. Kevin Scheunemann


    Owen made the accusation because it is tyranny.

    Where can Republicans go to undermine Democrat legislation with a judge?

    It is an awful imbalance of power.

    Until liberals stop advocating racist baby killing by abortion, stop rejecting the science of biological sex, stop putting the needs of illegals over citizens, and stop being awful bigots toward Christians…then yes, I will certainly consider your argument that liberals might not be morally evil.

    However, I am tired of this political correctness lecture at what I thought was a reasoned, well placed, opinion by Owen.

    I don’t disagree your post gave the appearance of eloquence, but in the end it was a “Shut up Owen because you express a very divisive idea” tone.

    Screaming “division”, “religion”, or “racism” is the oldest trick in liberal playbook to shut down debate in demanding certain ideas should not be expressed.

    I resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of my being.

    Nothing personal against you, but you pushed all my buttons with your post.

    I will second the accusation of tyranny, and I don’t care how many liberals demand I stop being divisive, because tyranny needs to be opposed if one considers themselves moral to the cause of ffreedom through the proper balance of powers in the WI Constitution.


  7. Pat

    Kevin said, “Screaming “division”, “religion”, or “racism” is the oldest trick in liberal playbook to shut down debate in demanding certain ideas should not be expressed.

    I resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of my being.”

    Kevin, you don’t resist that at all. You use religion, and racism consistently in your arguments to create division. Saying otherwise is a blatant lie.

  8. Kevin Scheunemann


    That is because there is good and evil.

    Unlike liberals, I will not tolerate the evil of Nambla’s political advocacy.

    Liberals want to tolerate stuff like that as “courage” and “enlightenment”. When “division” is not drawn, evil tends to be tolerated by the liberal lexicon.

  9. Kevin Scheunemann

    And Pat, I don’t use racism.

    I oppose the constant racism of the liberal lexicon.

    Liberals constantly insist to sort people by race, gender and carnal choices.

    I oppose that.

  10. Pat

    Kevin said, “And Pat, I don’t use racism.”

    But said in this thread, “liberals stop advocating racist baby killing”.

    I’ll prepare for your rationalization.

  11. Kevin Scheunemann



    I OPPOSE racism by advocating against the racist innocent child execution policies of the left!

    Since when is that controversial, or even debateable?

    Are you on the side of killing babies?

  12. Pat


    You just proved you do play the racism card.

  13. Kevin Scheunemann


    So by opposing the worst kind of evil racism…I play the racism card?

    So we should ignore, by silence, the disproportionate amount of black babies being executed by abortion liberals?

    That means you must support the evil.

  14. Pat


    But you can’t deny that you’re playing the racism card.

  15. Kevin Scheunemann


    To oppose the disproportionate liberal murder of innocent black babies.

    Liberal advocacy of genocide by skin color is awful, don’t you think?

  16. Pat


    Don’t you care about white babies? Why just pick out black babies? I would think you’d believe all babies matter. Why use race as a wedge issues this? That would be racist.

  17. Kevin Scheunemann


    I do.  However, I recognize liberals are driven by race in the debate.

    Since liberals don’t care about the evil slaughter of babies, they may care when they find out the slaughter, kills more black babies.

    Just a tactic to try and get through to those who don’t seem to care about the worst, most vile, liberal evil.


  18. Pat

    Kevin said, “I do. However, I recognize liberals are driven by race in the debate.”

    But you’re the one that appears to be driven by race and religion because you are constantly injecting those two things into these conversations.

  19. Mar

    Jordan, you are so full of crap. Just because one volunteers or is a good citizen makes them a competent judge. Just because he has a law degree makes him a good lawyer. Just because a person is a civil servant for a long time makes them independent.
    I am a teacher, where everyone has a degree, some volunteer and most are public servants. There are many that are so incompetent, they are a dangerous to their students academically and emotionally.
    So, stop the BS.

  20. jjf

    Kevin is very very concerned about the welfare of black people.

  21. Kevin Scheunemann


    I only do it in the cobra pit of intersectional politics.   In a world where liberalism does not bat an eye at the evil of baby killing, but is offended by everything as racism…injecting race killing in the baby killing debate may move liberals to be less evil.

    Is there a better way to get through to evil that supports baby killing?

    I like the argument, it seems to get you all bent out of shape.

  22. jjf

    Kevin’s being intersectional when he worries the most about the abortions of blacks, but don’t tell him.

  23. Kevin Scheunemann


    I worry about good and evil.   I don’t excuse evil because of race.

    I am quite shocked at the lack of supporting good and denouncing evil on basic issues.

    Victims of crime everywhere should never let liberals be in charge.

  24. Pat


    I’m not bent out of shape at all. You use racism and religion consistently more than anyone. Yet say, you “resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of my being.”

  25. Mar

    jjf, I’ve already proved you are a racist. You want others to join your party?

  26. Kevin Scheunemann


    I use it to nudge evil toward good.

    That is far different than using for evil.

  27. Le Roi du Nord


    The problem here is that only k gets to determine what is good, and what is evil.  I have a problem with that…

  28. Pat


    So you resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of your being. Except when you don’t.

    Rationalization is the second strongest human drive.

  29. Kevin Scheunemann


    Liberal Political Correctness is about nudging good toward evil.

    So I can see why you are confused.

  30. Pat


    I’m glad you’ve admitted using religion and racism after first denying doing so. That’s a big first step for repenting for a lie.

  31. Kevin Scheunemann


    Clearly, you are misreading the word “it”.

    Christianity is my guide.

    That means making simple discernment between good and evil.

    Discernment you, Nord, and jiffy pass on even when I serve simple clarity to denounce evil up on a silver platter.

    You guys tolerate evil because you value tolerance before the victims of evil in your lack of any moral clarity.

  32. Pat


    Are you now saying you don’t use religion and racism to help promote your personal agenda?

    First you said you don’t, then say you do, and now you’re saying you don’t again.

  33. Kevin Scheunemann

    I’m saying you have a very skewed view of “religion” as something automatically wrong or evil.

    That is why I use “Christianity”, not “religion” because “religion” is a broad category including vile evil like radical Islam.

    Also when I use race to save black babies from extermination, by influencing the debate, that is just good strategy toward liberals that see race in anything. Like I explained before….Liberals accept the total vile evil of innocent baby extermination, but get all bent out of shape about slightest race issue. If we can get vile liberal baby exterminators to see the race of the baby they exterminate, maybe we can get the serial killer advocates to soften their baby killing position. If saving babies, by influence in the debate, is “racist”, I guess I use race, but then everyone would be guilty by putting 2 words together if you are going to be that recklessly broad with both terms.

    Try to be more nuanced.

  34. jjf

    I see you two haven’t met!  Nuance, this is Kevin.  Kevin, this is nuance.

    Shorter Kevin:  Intersectionality is total vile evil, but I’ll use it to show these racists they’re being racist while I call them racist!


  35. Pat

    Kevin said, “Screaming “division”, “religion”, or “racism” is the oldest trick in liberal playbook to shut down debate in demanding certain ideas should not be expressed.

    I resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of my being.”

    Except when I do it! So, do as I say, not what I do.

  36. Kevin Scheunemann


    That statement is talking about chilling speech by putting one of those 3 labels on it.

    I am not putting those labels on anyone’s speech, except to prove a point about how vile the PC movement is.

    I live my Christianity in my positions, which includes opposing racist black bay killing.

    You are taking my statment completely out of context.

  37. Pat

    Kevin said, “That statement is talking about chilling speech by putting one of those 3 labels on it.”

    And you do that.

  38. Kevin Scheunemann


    Only to serve the irony of the danger of political correctness.

    Religious speech should not have second class treatment!

    Liberals hate it when PC tactics are used on them.   Nuking liberals with PC is the best way to get their thick skulls to understand the danger PC poses to a free society.

  39. Pat


    So you resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of your being. Except when you do it. There’s a word for that. Starts with hypo, and ends with crite.

  40. Le Roi du Nord


    “That statement is talking about chilling speech by putting one of those 3 labels on it”.

    “I am not putting those labels on anyone’s speech, except to prove a point about how vile the PC movement is”.

    Then why do you keep calling the BBT, evolution and CC/GW religions?  Your short term memory is failing, or you assume (incorrectly) that you can say whatever you want, whenever you want and nobody will notice.

    Hypocrite, thy name is k !

  41. Pat

    Awful! Just awful!

  42. Kevin Scheunemann

    Pat, Nord,

    You fear and resist that label because you know what kind of disparaging treatment your favored religions are in for if the label sticks.

    Stop being bigoted against Christians and Christian oriented speech is the underlying message.

    This is the danger you liberals set up by treating Christians and Christian ideas with such godless, bigoted, disdain.

  43. Pat


    What have I done to prohibit your right to free speech. I’ve always defended your right to say what ever you like. But I also defend my right to call you out, on those very rare occasions, when I think you’re totally wrong.

    God bless America. A place where everyone has the right to be wrong.

  44. Kevin Scheunemann


    You have done nothing, legally to prohibit my speech.

    However, I do have a problem with religious speech or religious thought sneer as a second class level of speech.

    The idea this type of speech has to be substantively sifted out of public square solely because one screams “religion” like it is an infection.

    That liberal PC bigotry is what I have a problem with.

  45. Pat


    You know, you’d be happier if you didn’t perpetuate yourself as a victim and embrace life.

  46. Le Roi du Nord


    Not at all.  I resist because they aren’t religions.  You are the only one calling those religions.

    Is dishonesty a major tenet of your version of religion, because you sure are a proficient practitioner.

  47. Kevin Scheunemann


    I’m a happy guy. I just enjoy the debate with those weak on denouncing basic evil.

    There is a lot of work to be done in stiffening the jello liberal spines on basic evil. (Or sweeping the jello down the storm drain to commune with nature…that makes me happy too.)

  48. Kevin Scheunemann


    You could not answer the science to the basic origin question on BBT.

    You have faith, not science.

    Even your fellow liberals acknowledged the lack of science.

    Just because you deny does not mean it is not a religion, worthy of second class speech treatment and ridicule.

  49. Pat


    You said you resist that kind of attitude toward speech by referencing religion with every fiber of your being. But continue to do so in your above statement. Your “being” appears to be pretty weak when it comes to resisting that kind of attitude.

  50. Kevin Scheunemann


    My flippping it in irony is part of my resistence.

    You note how Nord squeals when his speech could possibly be religated to the disgusting treatment he gives Christian ideas in the public square.   What is big deal  if I view leftist religions such as BBT, Evolution and global warming as “religions”?

    The big deal is: Nord recognizes the crap treatment (both in speech hostility and funding) his pet issues would get if the “religion” label sticks.  He finds that very unpleasant.


  51. Pat

    Kevin said, “My flippping it in irony is part of my resistence.”

    So it isn’t entirely true when you said you resist that kind of attitude with every fiber of your being.

  52. Le Roi du Nord


    You have degenerated into a mockery of a serious and intelligent human.  Now you resort to name-calling and lies to bolster your argument, sorta like your idol, 45.

    “Even your fellow liberals acknowledged the lack of science”.

    Smart folks have been studying those issues for a long time.  There is a lot more scientific evidence that you can provide from your book of fables.  I’m still waiting for ANY proof from you on the age of the earth.  Or why evolution is a hoax, or why CC/GW isn’t real.    And I’ll bet you chicken out again….

  53. Kevin Scheunemann


    I don’t do it to shut people up, but for some introspection.

    I acknowledge the liberals around here have little instrospection when it comes to mistreatment of free speech in the name of PC evil.

  54. Pat


    But you admit to doing something that you detest with every fiber of your being.

  55. Kevin Scheunemann


    Not quite.

    I do it in pursuit of preservation of free speech.

    To show the anti-religious bigots around here that all speech is worthy of same protection…even if it has a religious component.

    Unlike godless liberals, hostile to religious speech, my goal is to show them their hostility by attaching religion label to their favored faith initiatives.

    I fully understand we have a lot of “thick” liberals trolling here, but I enjoy the conversation.

  56. Pat

    Kevin rationalizes, “I do it in pursuit of preservation of free speech.”
    After saying he detests that behavior with every fiber of his being.

    I guess you can do something that you detest, with every fiber of your being, when others do it, if you can rationalize that behavior when you want to use it. That’s pretty hypocritical any way you try to rationalize it.

    Awful, just awful.

  57. Kevin Scheunemann


    Oh Pat, I detest speech chill tactics.

    If I use same tactics to get the liberal PC crazies to understand the damage of their tactics…that is opposing the evil with every fiber of my being.

  58. Pat


    Kevin said, “Screaming “division”, “religion”, or “racism” is the oldest trick in liberal playbook to shut down debate in demanding certain ideas should not be expressed.

    I resist that kind of attitude toward speech with every fiber of my being.”

    Except when you do it. Understood.

  59. Kevin Scheunemann


    I do it with much different intent.

    Didn’t you know that in intersectional liberal lexicon…intent means everything?

  60. Pat


    Oh, I understand. You resist it with every fiber of your being, except you don’t.

Pin It on Pinterest