Open letter; closed minds.

You’d have to be deliberately hiding from Wisconsin politics to not notice that a group of seven right-sided bloggers put up an “open letter” swearing their allegiance to anyone but Mark Neumann for a Republican Senate candidate. Here’s the prized piece on

They’re ticked because U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has endorsed Neumann’s campaign. So has The Club for Growth. Those conservative bloggers are unhappy, so let them speak. But I get to talk back. It’s the best part of my job as a fairly conservative housewife. 🙂

1) I didn’t recognize the last two names. Not that I’m the queen of all things blog related in Wisconsin, but I do waste quite a bit of time on this hobby. If I don’t know the names of Tim Gray and Ben Froland, then I’m thinking there’s a chance a few others won’t either. (By the way, welcome to both of you. What a way to make a splash.)

2) One of the bloggers, Kevin Binversie, is employed by a supposed non-partisan group as a Political Commentator / Reporter at Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity. Classy blowing that cover. You don’t get to play it both ways, Kev. I suspect you’ll be finding that one out soon. In the meantime, I asked Wisconsin Reporter to unsubscribe me from their email notices this morning. They don’t get to send me a survey asking about their independence in reporting and then have an employee sign an open letter slamming a Senate candidate. I’m not happy when the left fakes independence, so I guess I’ll keep it even.

3) The last word on these important matters didn’t even link the bloggers in his blip covering the document. Huffington Post did reward Steve Eggleston and Owen Robinson, though. Woot! Traffic is traffic.

4) Binversie slurped up fellow blogger James Wigderson’s entire enumeration of the counts against Neumann. There is just no more generous a way to reward a fellow blogger than to steal their entire content and thus rid readers the inconvenience of having to click a mouse button.

Sure that list is long, but it doesn’t document much. It offers opinion. We are flush with opinions in Wisconsin so far this season, aren’t we?

By the way, Wigderson writes for the MacIver Institute. At least they don’t play the non-partisan game. I still think it’s a mistake for the MacIver group to slap Mark Neumann like that. They may need Neumann some day.

5) Noticeably missing from the list: Fred Dooley.

6) There weren’t any squawkers on it, either. I did notice the left has picked up on the pundits’ displeasure with Tommy Thompson considering a run. So far Neumann has been spared a slapping from this group.

There are still a couple of us content with a Neumann run. Blogger Randy Melchert offered via Twitter:

I’d be happy with Mark Neumann as well

I’m certainly fine with the idea.

Of course you can expect those unhappy conservative bloggers to adopt Fitzgerald as a candidate any time now. Or not. You know, State Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald announced a week ago, and no one ran to back him.

How fortunate we are to live in such interesting times.


  1. Cage match! Cage match!

  2. Very nice write up. I apologize for forgetting about your blog for so long… I forgot how much I enjoyed your particular viewpoint.

  3. Aw, shucks.

  4. Could be my favorite post ever here(in my favorite righty blog)!

    It shows to what we saw in the recall elections, the republicans just dont have much talent in this state to run for office so they better be WELL funded!

  5. Because Democrats have such great candidates? No, they aren’t winning majorities, either.

    Republicans have a good candidate in Mark Neumann, but a few of them also have egos that stand in the way of supporting him. It’s too bad.

  6. Cindy, it is a mistake to ignore Neumann’s actions in the last election. Even though you will not hold him responsible many will.

    Ignoring that issue and impugning those who disagree won’t win Neumann any converts.

    Partisan issues in primary races always tend to drive people of similar philosophies apart. Democrats in this state understand that and the party usually gets behind a single candidate. This takes the voice away from the people at large which is a bad thing.

    Similarly the bloggers here are concerned with national figures trying to select Wisconsin’s candidate, I too have an issue with that.

    Let the candidates sell us themselves, this race has not really even started yet.

    Frankly I’m hoping a new face emerges someone in the Ron Johnson mold, a true outsider. Right now we have a choice of four career politicians, I still have hope we get another choice.

  7. My point, yet again, is that Neumann’s “actions” are poorly documented by those who hope to shame him.

    I guess if you want a true outsider you aren’t holding out for Kanavas, either. It is an interesting race.

  8. yes ron johnson was a man of the people, the republican party did not push him at all, they let the people speak! (sorry i cant even type that without laughing).

    There is quite a bit of talent just look at 2nd cong district we have Kelda Roys and Mark Pocan both brilliant people and great legislators running so far.

  9. Cindy, Mr. Wigderson did a pretty good job in a subsequent post of detailing Neumann’s behavior.

    Jeff, as usual you are several fries short of a Happy Meal. The party got behind Johnson once it became clear he was the front-runner. There were several other candidates.

    Marc Pocan brilliant? Talk about a funny statement.

  10. Wigderson offered his opinion, complete with one link to another blogger on the list, where the source document isn’t available. Such does not indicate Neumann’s behavior, but rather that of those who are trying – for whatever reason – to discredit Neumann.

    I listen to reason. But when it comes to pure opinion, I’ll put mine equal to anyone else’s. Prove to me Neumann is as bad as you (heck, I guess you should have signed that letter) say, and this is no longer a disagreement.

  11. Someone call J.B. Van Hollen and Doug Lafollette, because Mark Neumann has run for almost every elected office in the state – they’re next!

  12. He’s run for 3, I’d say that’s pretty average or below for one who has held elected office.

  13. In the WWE, he would be called a jobber.

  14. Cindy for a post where you call out others for closed minds yours is much the same. All of Wigderson’s mentiones were all true. A few minutes Googling and you could verify but you don’t want to.

  15. But you made the charges! Show me the proof and we’re done. It can’t be that hard.

  16. Ok, the sky is blue, the sun sets in the west, the ocean is deep, and the Capital Times is a liberal paper. All true, all common knowledge. Do you need proof?

  17. Seven conservative bloggers swear Mark Neumann isn’t worthy. Yes.

  18. All that activity happened Cindy if you wish to admit it or not.

  19. I don’t need to admit anything if you can’t prove it.

    What the heck is your problem here? (You were convicted of 27 dui’s. Prove I’m wrong.)

    *Edit – Just to be clear, that last sentence was to show how damning and silly it can be to make an accusation without any kind of proof to the statement.

  20. I’m done Cindy, go on and live in denial.

    I was trying to provide some helpful advice that if you want your guy to win you’ll have to deal with this issue. You’d rather ignore and impugn.

  21. Fred, Fred, Fred. All I did was show you how silly it is to make an accusation without backing it up. He’s not necessarily “my guy” as much as a legitimate candidate that needs to be vetted fairly. If you can’t prove your accusations, I feel strongly they must not have much in the way of merit. All you have to do to redeem your strong anti-Neumann stance is offer a few links that aren’t he said/he said in nature.

    As I’ve said all along, it can’t be that hard.

  22. Can prove Cindy, shouldn’t need to, I don’t really want to spend two hours digging for links for something you’ll still dismiss.

    This all happened recently. You just wish to deny reality.

    All I’m saying is Neumann will have to deal with this if he wants to win the partisan primary.

    Besides if I did all the research and posted it you would likely just label it as hatred anyway.

  23. You linked to opinion pieces. Link to hard news and we won’t have a problem.

  24. Well that’s a start. Sorry the software held up all the links. I’ll get to them one by one and see if there’s any real news there.

    I must ask Fred: What kept you from signing that letter? You are very much a fan of what they said.

  25. Have you not been paying attention Cindy?

    I have said from the start of this and before that letter was produced that Neumann would have to deal with these issues in order to have any chance at winning a partisan primary. You just labeled that Neumann hate and made the choice to ignore these issues.

    I also said I was willing to give him a chance, something the letter signers were not willing to do.

    I believe people can change and I hope Neumann does.

    And for the record just because the newspaper didn’t cover this story or that does not mean that event did not happen. You are a blogger who should know better.

  26. See below:

    Someone followed up on a rumor. Egads! That should never happen in politics.

    Neumann didn’t seek the WisGOP endorsement. That’s a damning offense?

    Neumann asked for a Town Hall style series of debates. Oh, that’s damning all right. Politicians should never debate. Prior to an election.

    Interior links are dead, so I can’t say one way or another. It sure looks like opinion by one of the others who signed the open letter.

    Neumann thinks candidate advertising should come from the candidates and not third parties. I kind of agree with him on that one. Our campaigns are beserk these days. I’ve disagreed with the Supreme Court before. I doubt this will be the last time.

    The “locked out” thing is still all he said/he said. That Neumann was shut out of the WisGOP lovefest isn’t news. Neither side has offered a clean explanation of what happened. It’s politics. If you want to climb into the middle of all that whining and takes sides it’s your choice.

    “Walker accused Neumann of using misleading telephone calls to try to quash turnout at the May 22 Republican convention and prevent Walker from getting the endorsement.

    Patrick Dorwin’s opinion as to what constitutes a career politician or a negative ad is simply that: opinion.

    Link is bad to CBS Minnesota.

    Neumann paid the fees once the error was determined. Your problem with this is?

    Hmm. That one says “Walker accused Neumann of using misleading telephone calls to try to quash turnout..” I thought you were trying to prove Mark Neumann was the whiner.

    Another story about Neumann not pursuing the party endorsement. We have elections, not boss choices. I still don’t see why you are so angry about that.

    A TEA Party organizer opinion on your website. Really?

    The Klauser thing is a joke. Klauser is a joke. But that’s my opinion.

    Another link to the Schneider piece re: campaign financing. See above.

    Heresay from another of the letter signing crowd to a link we’ve already covered. Does including it twice make it true?

    Reiterates a STAFFER was supposedly spreading rumors. Neumann clamped down on it. A bad campaign employee does not mean it’s a bad candidate. If that were the case Walker would be so buried under Bader manure he’d never crawl out.

    I know you think you are making a case by demanding your points are truths. It’s all out there now. Readers can decide for themselves.

  27. You are hopeless Cindy.

    I have not the time or energy to answer all of that but I’ll just provide some insight into one of those.

    You say, “A TEA Party organizer opinion on your website. Really?”

    This was a release from Lora Halberstadt someone who has put in countless hours of volunteer work towards the cause.

    She was responding to Neumann’s ridiculous claim that the TEA party supported his candidacy.

    That claim was based on one straw poll from one small group of less than two dozen members.

    From that small sample Neumann tried to claim a larger endorsement that he in deed did not have.

    That is an ethical failing on his part. And you just wave it off.

    Well guess what, Lora Halberstadt has a network of several thosuand people that respect her views and her endorsements even though you clearly don’t care at all.

    How do you think that kind of attitude will help your preferred candidate? Clue in, it won’t.

    The only thing closed minded around here is apparently you.

    Personally I find it insulting that you dismiss Lora’s very real concern so easily.

    Or do you approve of Mr. Neumann’s claim that he had the endorsement of the TEA party based on one small group’s straw poll?

    That would be like his claining the endorsement of the entire conservative blogosphere because you supported him.

    Your stance is ridiculous.

  28. Yawn

  29. So there’s only one TEA Party Fred? Just one, kind of like the Republican party? And I’d be glad to opine further but there’s no source document re: the straw poll.

    My stance isn’t ridiculous; it is fair. The facts as you define them are out there now. Folks can decide for themselves if your claims are valid.

    BTW, The Lorax wins the comment war.

  30. Whatever. As I said tried to offer some advice. You are too blind to see it. The Lorax is a joke too.

  31. Sometimes, yes, but he may be the wisest one in this conversation right now.

    Are you most angry that I won’t mind you or that you aren’t getting your way here?

  32. I remember Mark Belling announcing on his radio show that Neumann was dropping out of the race. Oh, then he called it an April Fool’s ‘joke’. Knowing how closely tied Belling was to Walker in that race, that ‘rumor’ may as well have come from a ‘staffer’ ( or more appropriately, The Puppeteer?), yet no one jumped on that incident as negative.

    Cindy. Keep at it. You are getting to the essence of the issue. Just because it is said, doesn’t make it so. I appreciate your logical persistence in vetting the tangle of untruths so craftily regurgitated by those bloggers.

  33. Fred has oppositional defiant disorder. I know a guy who’s got an old shock therapy chamber, we’ll fix this little thorn in our side.

  34. Oh, be good.

  35. Sorry, might have had an adult beverage with dinner. Night kiddos, play nice!