How is it possible that the writings which appeared in the Marquette University newspaper never came to the attention of her Republican buddies? How did her ethical lapse in regards to her extramarital affair and the case surrounding it not register with those who wanted to promote her?
Could it be that Walker and Company were trying to pass a fast one over the public?
Or was Rebecca Bradley somehow able to use her womanly charm on a governor who had the power she needed to get a step up the legal ladder? Did she bat her eyes, or flip her hair back, or tell him much Ronald Reagan would be proud of his anti-union stands?
There has to be some explanation for the total lack of accountability as to how Bradley was able to get this far with such a troubling and tawdry past. Voters need to know the truth.
This is framed as a scandalous, extramarital affair, even though Bradley was separated from her husband at the time of her relationship with Bednall.
Before she became a state Supreme Court justice, Rebecca Bradley represented in a child placement case the former COO of the law firm where they both had worked — and with whom she’d had a romantic relationship.
Steve Walters, senior producer at Wisconsin Eye, asked Kloppenburg to respond to an ad by a third-party group that includes a clip of Kloppenburg saying, “I never said I was tough on crime. Being tough on crime was not my message.” Kloppenburg swiftly denounced the ad saying the clip was 5 years old and implied it was not relevant to the current race. Moments earlier she had pointed to her opponent’s 24 year-old statements as evidence of why she isn’t the right choice for the state’s top court.
“Well, that is a clause taken out of context from 5 years ago,” Kloppenburg said.
Forget hate-filled articles that candidate Rebecca Bradley wrote as a student years ago. Much more important is how she handles that issue today. Much more important are the politically extreme groups in which she has actively participated as an adult. Much more important are the powerful lobbyists and dark money groups to whom she is indebted. Those are much better reasons to not vote for Rebecca Bradley on April 5.
What troubles me, though, is how Bradley comes up with her views today — specifically, are her court decisions derived from precedents and research, or does she justify her decisions through politically conservative viewpoints consistent with the point in time she makes them in? Her recent political associations, which she hardly tries to hide, suggests it’s the latter.
I wrote about Bradley’s college opinions on Monday and explained that her words were troubling because they were very hate-filled. But I also explained my concerns that it seemed like her line of thinking — and in fact, her judicial philosophy — was more derived from her conservative views and what are popular viewpoints in conservatism today, rather than sound research, stare decisis and empirical evidence. – See more at: http://political-heat.blogspot.com/2016/03/rebecca-bradleys-opinions-may-have.html#sthash.303zdoPz.dpuf
The revelations by One Wisconsin Now of Rebecca Bradley’s vile printed opinions against gay people and those afflicted with HIV/AIDS are bad enough, even if she wrote it while she was in college in 1992. First off, I graduated high school in 1992, the summer after Magic Johnson revealed he had caught HIV through unprotected heterosexual sex, and to say something like this about people with HIV/AIDS was way out of bounds back then.
On Election Day voters can say how they feel about the tone of the election as much as they can over the issues. The best way to let Bradley know her hate and bitterness is not the stuff that makes for Wisconsin values is to simply not vote for her. Cast a ballot for someone else, or no one in the race. Let your voice be front and center for how we want our candidates to behave as they ask us for the responsibility to lead.
If they can not respect us during the campaign what hope do we have after they are elected?
A million-dollar ad for Justice Bradley, and why –
And as I have pointed out in the past, Milwaukee County Executor, er, Executive Chris “Boss” Abele had endorsed Bradley when she was running for reelection as a circuit court judge three years ago.
Not only did Abele endorse her, but his statement regarding the endorsement should leave one wondering about his own judgment and temperament….
“To those offended by comments I made as a young college student, I apologize, and assure you that those comments are not reflective of my worldview. These comments have nothing to do with who I am as a person or a jurist, and they have nothing to do with the issues facing the voters of this state,” said Bradley in a statement.
Bradley did not elaborate on the self-examination and analysis in which she engaged, leading her to a new and different conclusion on ‘abnormal degenerates’.
Wisconsinites should be aware of the type of person running for election on the state Supreme Court. Her strangely worded explanation strains credulity, and is unconvincing.