February 19, 2010

How do you plead on judicial endorsements?

How important are endorsements from law enforcement officers in a local judicial election? We're about to find out.

The two candidates running for the Circuit Court seat to be vacated by retiring Judge Stephen Simanek clearly have a difference of opinion about their value.

Atty. Georgia Herrera thinks highly of them. The more the merrier, it appears. She sent out five press releases this weekend, touting endorsements of her candidacy: from the Racine County Deputy Sheriffs Protective Association, the Wisconsin Troopers Association, Racine Police Chief Kurt Whalen and acting Burlington Police Chief Mark Anderson (and one summarizing them all).

The quote from Deputy Chad Schulman, president of the Sheriff's Protective Association was typical: "The deputies worked closely with Georgia during her eleven years as a criminal prosecutor in Racine County. Her law enforcement experience and good judgment are needed on the bench. She’ll work hard to keep our streets safe."

Herrera reinforced the message: “These endorsements come from working law enforcement professionals who work every day to protect the public. They know my work as criminal prosecutor and more recently as Court Commissioner. They know first-hand my dedication to hard work and safe communities,” Herrera said.

On her website, she lists the names of no fewer than 89 law enforcement officers as endorsers or supporters: police chiefs, judges, officers -- including 53 members of the Racine Police Department (as well as about 200 citizen supporters). Of course, sometimes endorsement can backfire; six out of 10 (admittedly anonymous) comments appended to our story about a pair of Herrera's earlier endorsers -- by Racine County District Atty. Micheal Nieskes and Racine County Sheriff Robert Carlson -- called Nieskes' support the kiss of death.

Meanwhile, Herrera's opponent, Atty. Gene Gasiorkiewicz, is taking a different approach. In a story in the Journal Times on Feb. 12 on the subject, Herrera is quoted as saying those two endorsements show that Nieskes and Carlson "have strong confidence that I can do what the community wants in terms of keeping streets safe and making sure that criminals are made responsible for their actions." Gasiorkiewicz is quoted in that story saying, "My whole campaign is about judicial neutrality. I am not seeking political endorsements. I want to run an apolitical campaign. ... I am trying to make this a nonpolitical situation. I think that's what the people deserve and what the position ought to be."

After we received Herrera's press releases this weekend, we asked Gasiorkiewicz -- who also is a former prosecutor and says he has "fine relationships with many law enforcement officers throughout the county."-- to elaborate on the endorsement issue. Here's a portion of what he sent us:
"I would like to directly talk about the issues regarding the endorsements my opponent received from some police unions, members of the law enforcement profession and some of her former colleagues in the Office of the Racine County District Attorney. It cannot be emphasized enough that those endorsements were made without the endorsing parties even bothering to ask me about my experience and positions on the issues. The fact that I was allowed no input demonstrates those endorsements were not based upon a thorough comparison of the experience and positions of the candidates.

"The judicial selection process is non-partisan. That means the merits of the candidates should not be viewed through a political lens. The most important foundation of our legal system is judicial independence. Injecting partisan politics into the judicial selection process undermines the integrity of the judiciary. There have been a number of Wisconsin judicial contests in the recent past where individuals and groups with special interests have tried to influence the outcome, often through mechanisms that involved distorting the record of the candidate they opposed. I find that practice abhorrent and it will not be part of my campaign. The people of Racine County deserve a neutral, detached and independent judge to hear any case brought before the court.

"The statute of justice is blind folded to signify that justice is to be blind -- all persons are equal in the eyes of the law. A police officer's son is to receive the same justice as anyone else. The selection of judges also works best when the voter compares candidates not based merely on their name or what political connections they have fostered. The voter should weigh the candidates in much the same way as the statute of justice signifies. Candidates should be compared not based on their name or their political connections, but instead the voter should determine whom to vote for based on weighing the relative experience and qualifications of the candidates... look beyond the politics that have become a part of this race and not let special interest groups determine who receives their vote."
Gasiorkiewicz lists no "endorsements" as such on his website, only 10 "testimonials" from state attorneys.

Do endorsements mean "a great deal... about qualified, respected individuals in the community showing support for a proven candidate," or are they "like bananas -- you can buy them by the bunch," as opposing commenters argued on the JT's blog?

We'll find out on April 6.

96 comments:

  1. Gene has my vote. He is by far the best and most experienced candidate. Has does not owe the political favors that his opponent does. He also is not connected to Jeff Neubaurer or a Political Party like his opponent is.

    Endorsements from law enforcement show a bias that may not be able to be put aside if Georgia is elected. A Judge should not owe anyone when making decisions from the bench!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actions speak louder than words.
    SDJ

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have to agree that politicizing the campaign is not beneficial. Even if a judge does not consciously repay favors, there is alway that thought in the back of the head to lean in favor of those who supported you politically.

    I know nothing of either one of these candidates. But, based on this article, and assuming Gene Gasiorkiewicz is being honest and truthful, I would have to vote for him. At least at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why are city employees endorsing a candidate? Federal employees can't use their authority to endorse, it seems like city employees shouldn't either.

    This is a huge conflict of interest and the Post should look into this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. These endorsements are meaningless.


    People should be concerned with a candidate or judge that has that close ties with law-enforcement!

    The thought that a judge will be working under the "GOOD OLE BOY" system is pretty scary!

    ReplyDelete
  6. What??????

    The Racine Post should look into individuals exercising their 1st Amendment free speech rights....

    Anon 9:12...you're an idiot!

    ReplyDelete
  7. So all these attorneys have written this woman a check and let her use their names publicly? I guess they'll get their receipt in the courtroom.

    Can you spell PAYOLA?

    ReplyDelete
  8. 9:32 Look up the Hatch Act.

    Federal employees can't use their authority to endorse candidates. It seems to me that the District Attorney and Chief of Police are using exactly that authority in a non-partisan race.

    The Hatch Act may not apply to city employees, but it should! I don't pay their salaries for this.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If you read the interview in the JT's of the two candidates, Georiga could not intelligently answer one question. I base my voting on what the candidate say and does, not based on any endorsements. Gene certainly has my vote.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The endorsements are valuable insight as to how these folks will behave. So far many of the endorsements for Georgia are hurting her in the community. Some of the elected and appointed officials endorsing her have become very unpopular in the community over the past year or so. Mom always said you are judged by the people that you associate with in life.

    Sorry Georgia, I would have supported you until I saw your endorsements.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I hate to make this too simple...

    Left wingers LOVE endorsements. They run around to every other left winger and get endorsements from those of like minds.

    By the way, Anon 9:32, you are an idiot.

    Anon 9:12 makes an interesting point. Federal employees are not allowed to endorse any political candidate. It is a fair question to ask why that distinction is different on a local level.

    Labeling someone who asks a good question an idiot just shows you to be an intolerant fool.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I looked at the list of endorsers and isn't Lenny Hand deceased?

    Seriously. If you list people no longer living you're overreaching.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anon 10:37 - HUMANS love endorsements, you dolt.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I've had it with cronyism! Why is the Sheriff's picture on Herrera's website?

    There is NO WAY she will be fair and impartial with this parade of friends who are paid in full. This cannot possibly be ethical!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cash for Court!

    Georgia sold the peach.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If I am an attorney and I give Herrera $200 the day before the election as a campaign "contribution" but if I give her $200 the day after the election, I go to jail for bribing a judge.

    The cops and lawyers are buying their very own judge!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Endorsing Georgia without even talking to Gene....holy balls!

    I hope that isn't a reflection of the quality of inestigative work of the police force. Seriously, shouldn't you actually interview both candidates before endorsing? Seems reasonable to me.

    I expect and demand our police leadership to take the endorsement process a little more seriously. Endorsement is a responsibilty that shouldn't be subverted for cronyism, money, or just plain laziness to do your homework.

    I think these endorsers should have to answer for their shocking betrayal of the public.

    ReplyDelete
  18. So, I didn't really give much thought to all of this until I read Gene's reply and he's right.

    Judge's shouldn't be politicians and have their hand out for contributions and endorsements from people who will show up in your courtroom like lawyers and police. How can you be fair if one side in a case gave you money and endorsed you on your website.

    I also don't understand how it is possible for all these city employees to be listed as supporters. We pay them to do their job not use their job to tell me how to vote.

    My vote goes to Gene.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I like Gene's approach. Stay neutral and do your job. If you're good then your actions speak for itself. By the virtue of Georgia needing all of these endorsements, it shows she is the far weaker candidate. Gene stands on his record alone and I respect that. We need more of this kind if attitude and less of the old style backdoor games that Georgia is playing.

    Good luck Gene.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hey Pete - can you get comments from these endorsers on what their process is? The whole thing sounds shady when they are using their positions of public trust to endorse a candidate over another one that they didn't even bother to interview.

    I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt but would like to hear right from the horse's mouth why they think it is acceptable.

    We shouldn't allow people to just keep getting away with this kind of stuff. If the endorsements are going to be used to pursuade the public then the public has the right to know how those endorsements were arrived at. I think that is fair.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Gene is by far the most qualified and has shown class and integrity.

    No cronies in the courtroom!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Gene, Gene
    Fought the political machine.

    Georgia, Georgia
    ....crap nothing rhymes with Georgia but pretend this does:
    Made it go

    Pete, Pete
    Dropped a tweet
    And blew the whole damn endorsement process defeat

    Endorse this! Pow!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Georgia lost her last election and has spent years working on getting all these endorsements. Don't you think that she should have been working on more important things? That says a lot to me.

    Is she going to be just another politician more concerned with building up for her next campaign instead of spending her time studying her cases? I think so.

    That's the last thing we need in a courtroom ritht now.

    ReplyDelete
  24. She hasn't had much of a practice either - therefore she's looking for a job.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Do you know who has got Georgia on their minds?

    Cronies that bought themselves favors with their endorsements and images used for advertising when they are supposed to be non-political.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This is Dickert's fault...I need to connect him to this. The black community needs to fault him for everything.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Don't pick on Mayor Ert

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think she is very sweet. She is always smiling and seems very nice to everyone.
    Plus she seems very smart so she can always learn on the job like everyone else does.

    ReplyDelete
  29. So Carlson, Whalen and Nieskes gave Hererra public endorsements and let her use pictures of them and other cops in their uniforms. None of these guys even bothered to talk to Gasiorkiewicz? That's great.

    We have the best judges money can buy.

    I agree with the person earlier that said Federal employees can't do this kind of thing. Judges are supposed to be independent.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Georgia is clearly the most qualified candidate. The recent attention surrounding Georgia's endorsements seems like a tactic to detract from her opponent's obvious lack of skills and qualifications. It's the oldest trick in the book - I suggest you focus on what your candidate brings to the table - you'll have much less to blog about! Lastly, I consider endorsements critical, on par with job references for any job candidate. Georgia- you have my support. Your endorsements are relevant - keep running a clean - dignified campaign!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Why are municipal employees giving endorsements to someone who can further their careers in the courtroom? Seriously. It is illegal for federal employees to do this.

    How many cases will Hererra have to recuse herself from because a case has a cop or a lawyer that paid for her seat on the bench?

    This is outrageous.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Gene neglected to tell the reporter that he did indeed ask for some endorsements, however, was turned down. It's interesting how endorsements are viewed as a negative by the candidate that can't secure them. Ms. Herrera is ethical, experienced and proven - she has my vote!

    ReplyDelete
  33. I question anyone that pimps themselves out to get hollow endorsements from people that did not even bother to evaluate the issues before making a decision.

    To take pride in something like that reflects on the weakness of the candidate.

    I'd take Gene any day. He lets his work do the talking and doesn't have to pin all of his hopes on paper endorsements that aren't based on substance.

    The fact that Georgia touts these fake endorsements so much, reveals how weak of a candidate she is.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Georgia's skills and her relevant experience is what Racine needs - people from law enforcement to concerned citizens looking for safer streets can see that. Georgia understands all aspects of law and the courts. Not only does she have the right skills, but she is running a solid campaign. I can't say the same about her opponent. I can't imaging putting someone on the bench (Gene)who has so little skill and experience to base his campaign on that he has to attack his opponent. Georgia will make a fantastic judge!

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm going to make up my own mind anyway - in the instance, for Georgia Herrera - but knowing that people who work with the process every day respect her skills is a plus.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Gene's credentials are sterling, he is widely respected and has shown he has class and integrity. These are the qualities I look for in a judge.

    Hererra's career has been mediocre at best. Every lawyer in town knows her husband has been twisting arms for weeks to get endorsements.

    ReplyDelete
  37. What I see as ridiculous is Gene's record and experience - he doesn't belong in a courtroom! I will vote for Herrera, particularly after seeing the trash that Gene is having his supporters post. Nothing about his merits - because he has none. Matter of fact, after seeing this, I plan to be a visible, avid supporter of Ms. Herrera's campaign. I always felt Georgia was the right candidate, thanks for helping me see she is the ONLY candidate!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Too bad Gene was turned down for those 'fake' endorsements as you call them. If endorsements are viewed so poorly by Georgia's opponent, then why did he go after some?? Interesting twisting of facts. Speaking of facts - Georgia has my vote and my full support - she will bring a wealth of experience, not to mention dignity to the bench! Thanks for putting yourself out there Georgia - Racine will be lucky to have you as our next judge!

    ReplyDelete
  39. No cash for court!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Vote for Georgia! She has all the dignity money can buy!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anonymous @ 5:11 pm, You may want to dig a little deeper into the 'sterling' credentials of Georgia's OPPONENT...

    ReplyDelete
  42. A vote for Georgia Herrera is an opportunity to make Racine County a stronger environment in which to work and live! I have put my support behind Georgia -her qualifications speak for themselves!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Nice anonymous innuendo.

    I think people on this thread are asking a very good question whether it is ethical to take money and endorsements from people you will see in court as a judge.

    I'd like a statement from Hererra on how she will be fair and impartial when the Sheriff, Chief or an attorney endorser appears before her in court?

    ReplyDelete
  44. I am supporting Georgia - for all the relevant skills and experience that she brings to the table. Not sure why you bring her husband into this - you may want to try and look for the attributes of her opponent, as there don't seem to be any.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Georgia will bring a wealth of experience, high character and honesty to the bench! It's critical to me that a candidate demonstrate character and the right experience to do the job. Georgia has what it take to be Racine County's next judge.

    ReplyDelete
  46. This thread is about her endorsements genius. That's the topic.

    Explain how your candidate will be fair and impartial when one of the attorneys in the courtroom is one of her endorsers?

    Politicizing a judges race is wrong and not beneficial to the court.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Herrera has the most law enforcement experience, endorsements from both the community and law enforcement.

    Her opponent can whine about what he doesn't have and present a professional mirage of what he might be able to bring to bench.

    Yeah and I want to be judge too!

    If you think endorsements from the people who work in the real world of law enforcement doesn't say it all then vote for the dirty politician!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Georgia has these endorsements because she worked with law enforcement for years and they know her. I’m glad to see they respect her work enough to support her, and the endorsements are meaningful.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Georgia:

    I promise to sell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me money.

    She's an insider playing a game against the people. We need new blood. New Genes.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I am as well, so sick of these politicians or individuals who are running for judge who run these dirty campaigns.

    Herrera you in mind have the best character and experience to be the next circuit judge of Racine.

    Keep it clean and you have my vote Herrera.

    ReplyDelete
  51. One more time:

    Explain how your candidate will be fair and impartial when one of the attorneys in the courtroom is one of her endorsers?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Racine needs Gene therapy, not the Georgia Kickback from endorsers that were too lazy to read the positions each has taken.

    ReplyDelete
  53. We all have a stake in this election because it has been recently reported by Pete and Dustin that once a judge is elected in Racine County it is likely they will stay a judge until they retire. Judges in our county rotate so that means this new judge will not just be working with law enforcement. This is a big decision and we all need to listen to both candidates when they speak and then look into their professional lives and balance their resumes. One will rise to the top because we will vote for the most experienced person for the job.

    ReplyDelete
  54. So this opponent of G. Herrera has no endorsements and some testimonials.

    Let see, a candidate with exceptional law enforcement endorsements or a I want to be judge candidate with some friendly testimonials. I bet Herrera has a few more testimonials as well!

    No brainer......Herrera!

    ReplyDelete
  55. He obviously wanted endorsements, that's why he asked for "testimonials." He's whining now because Georgia worked harder and got them. We all know she'll be independent, and I'm sure her independence is what caused judges to appoint her to be deputy family court commissioner, and circuit court commisisoner. Georgia will be a great judge.

    ReplyDelete
  56. "We all know she'll be independent"

    I don't know that at all and if I was in court before her I sure as hell wouldn't believe it.

    BTW: The Hatch Act also applies by extension to certain employees of state and local governments whose positions are primarily paid for by federal funds...like stimulus dollars. 89 members of law enforcement. I wonder if any are getting paid by the fed?

    Sounds like something a qualified lawyer should know.

    ReplyDelete
  57. So this is Gene's best strategy - to sit behind closed doors and strategize against his opponent because he has no merits of his own to stand on? How disappointing. I am now voting for HERRERA. I did the research, she definitely has the experience needed for this job - and that's more than I can say for her opponent! Thanks for opening my eyes!

    ReplyDelete
  58. From what I have seen, Gene has no more qualifications to be judge than I do. He will not uphold the law because he doesn't understand it. It will be open season for criminals if Georgia's opponent gets elected. I am supporting the candidate that will be tough on crime and uphold the laws - definitely Georgia Herrera.

    ReplyDelete
  59. To answer the original question - judicial endorsements are important. I want to know from those in law enforcement, which candidate they trust and feel will uphold our laws to the greatest extent. Instead of trying to make a mockery out of one candidates solid list of endorsements, let's look at qualifications, that's what really matters here.

    ReplyDelete
  60. curious mind2/22/2010 7:30 PM

    Here's something to think about:
    Judge Stephen Simanek is hearing the Becker case. I don't know about Simanek, but Herrera has many, many mutal friends of Becker. Had this race been a couple of years ago and she had won would she have recused herself from the Becker trial?

    Should we even have to ask that question in the first place? I don't think so. She's so far into the clique of Racine influence that it's going to be difficult to not have her hear cases where there is some sort of connection.


    She ran against Judge John Jude, 6 years ago. Now he is running for re-election unopposed. Why isn't she running against him again?

    ReplyDelete
  61. LOL! Herrera brought this on herself by blabbing all over town how many cronies had endorsed her making her look compromised and bought.

    I did my own research on qualifications and it's not even close. If Herrera works hard for another decade she might match Gene's qualifications.

    Check out their websites:

    http://www.georgiaherrera.com/
    click on "About Georgia" for her nice, if brief resume.

    then go to:
    http://geneforjudge.com/qualifications.html

    No wonder she's made such a big deal about the city workers and lawyers on her list...she needs to.

    Gene blows her out of the water and she still looks compromised and bought.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Georgia is endorsed by Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Judges, etc.... Sounds to me like she's non-partisan independent. WHy else would people of such different backgrounds and viewpoints support her? She's got my vote. She has obviously earned the support of people who have seen her in action!

    ReplyDelete
  63. It's a matter of perspective. I look at the credentials of both candidates and wonder why Gene is wasting his time, he's neither qualified nor got the integrity needed for a judge.

    ReplyDelete
  64. And by the way, Gene is wasting his time and money on his go negative consultants, it reflects a fundamental gap in his experience and qualifications - big time. I wouldn't vote for him after this if he were the only candidate running.

    ReplyDelete
  65. outside the inside2/22/2010 8:02 PM

    qualifications?
    This is from Gasiokiewicz's lit piece

    Former Municipal judge

    Racine county court commissioner

    Ranked in the top 5% of lawyers in Wisconsin

    Selected by his peers as a "Super Lawyer"

    Past President of Racine County Bar Association

    Appointed by Wi. Supreme Court to Judge Lawyers misconduct cases

    Ranked as one of the best lawyers in America

    Law Clerk, Mississippi Supreme Court.

    I would say those are some pretty impressive qualifications!

    And, Herrera lists 65 financial contributors compared to Gasiorkiewicz' 80. So, if she's got all the support from the people why is it that when the rubber meets the road in actual donations he's got more? Maybe because she's getting lip service from people afraid to say no to her husband?

    Compare their two websites and honestly say that he doesn't have a better list of knowledgeable supporters. Really, who cares if some local loud mouths and city hall insiders support her? This is such a blantant case of who you know it's downright sad.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Who is going negative? Seems to me some people are on here that were just making fun of Georgia for her desperate tactics and then the Georgia people got on and that's when it got dirty.

    Really take a good look at her list of supporters and ask yourselves if all of these people deserve to be listened to. Some are nobodies wanting to be somebodies.

    ReplyDelete
  67. So I reviewed each of the websites. I read about a winner and a loser. I know both of these individuals personally. I see endorsements made by people who have had legal problems themselves foreclosures, bankruptcies, DUI's etc. I see an Annette Ziegler situation growing in Racine and that will cost the taxpayers twice as much because like Annette one of these candidates will not recuse themselves and I fear that many lawsuits against the County are around the corner along with mistrials. How many times will court adjourn early? Every event I have attended one of them have had to leave early - so this leads me to believe that trials will be delayed and again costing taxpayer dollars.

    ReplyDelete
  68. "he's neither qualified..."

    Gene has handled over 300 jury trials! Get serious.

    I'm no consultant and I wouldn't know Gene if he rang my doorbell, but I'm sick and tired of city hall cronies looking out for their own friends.

    ReplyDelete
  69. 8:32

    Amen to that.

    ReplyDelete
  70. I have looked at both web-sites, talked with both candidates - I have done the research and I will stick with my candidate thank you. Georgia's leadership & experience is what I will be voting for.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "I see a...situation growing in Racine and that will cost the taxpayers twice as much because one of these candidates will not recuse themselves and I fear that many lawsuits against the County are around the corner along with mistrials."

    That is a very powerful argument that cannot be ignored. If I was in her courtroom against another lawyer that had padded her campaign coffer and I lost. You bet your a&& I would go for a mistrial or a conflict lawsuit.

    ReplyDelete
  72. curious mind2/22/2010 10:01 PM

    What is her husband's last name? Is he involved in city politics?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Leavell - His name might be level but he is in as deep as you can get into city politics. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't carry a big stick around the courthouse.

    So why didn't she say his name on her website? Because she wants the Hispanic vote. Sorry Georgia but everyone has tried to get them out to vote and they refuse. Doesn't look like too many of them were asked for endorsements. Hmmm how well is your maiden name working for you these days?

    ReplyDelete
  74. In The Know...isn't.

    Jeff Leavell's name IS listed on Georgia Herrera's website, in the middle (more or less alphabetically) of a listing of attorneys supporting her candidacy.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Pete-How would anyone know that is her husband. Go to her website and click about Georgia. She only lists his first name duh!

    ReplyDelete
  76. Bottom line, Police officers are human, they lie. I was told that by a prominent atty once who is out of Kenosha.

    I agree with many here how can one be endorsed by a socialized entity supported by the tax payers (the police).

    Many good Points have been made. I do not trust the police not from personal experience but because how can one not be unbiased in a situation when the her campaign is endorsed by those she would have to challenge?

    Just my two cents, trying to be a critical thinker LMAO

    ReplyDelete
  77. I'm offended Gene would call police officers "politicians." They put their lives on the line every day for our safety. This isn't a political game for them. They've endorsed Georgia Herrera becasue they know she understands the criminal law, the big majority of a judge's responsibility. I think that's why he has no local endorsements from police or deputies, and instead relies on endorsements from lawyers from out of the County.

    ReplyDelete
  78. If I read his input correctly - he trying to keep this apolitical. Which means you do not collect endorsements - you run on merit/experience. In Racine there is a serious problem with political entitlement - As voters we have an opportunity to end this right now. The people should be leading in this community - not relying on elected officials who have their own personal agendas.

    ReplyDelete
  79. If Georgia does not get this job, she'll be filing for unemployment - this women needs this job, but is not qualified.

    ReplyDelete
  80. anon 6:41
    Gene never called police officers politicians. However, Carlson is a politician and not only ran for office but had to choose a party to do so. That would make him a politician and a partisan one as well as the county's top cop.

    She also went out of her way to gather endorsements from people from rather far ends of the two major parties. I find that a decidedly political tactic. Gene turned to his own profession for testimonials from people who actually know quite well the judicial system and how courts work. I think that is much more logical and addresses his actual credentials more than how long he has been cultivating endorsements.

    BTW, I agree with In The Know about people not knowing her husband's last name. That's a good example of how she presumes that people should just know who she is married to. What a snob.

    ReplyDelete
  81. I appreciate endorsements. They let you know who has the respect of their peers.
    Georgia Herrera has my vote - she will be fair and unbiased.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Herrera has my support, in addition to her proven experience, she will bring integrity and solid character to the bench. The rhetoric on this blog is offensive, not sure what a canfidate's spouse, nor maiden name, nor group of supposed voters has to do with qualifications . Stick to the issues ..... You're reaching.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Ask the Sheriff and the Chief if Gene asked for their endorsement. I think you will find the answer surprising!

    ReplyDelete
  84. The city would be taking on a serious liability in having a woman who owes her election to cops and lawyers who endorse her. She would have a conflict of interest to every one of them who come in her courtroom.

    Gene's qualifications are excellent. He is independent and won't be tangled up in political debts.

    ReplyDelete
  85. To 8:56 are you serious? Keeping an Hispanic maiden name is a political game. Not letting the voters know who her husband is can be called deceitful. She is a Democrat and she and her husband have alot of IOU's to pay off from the last failed campaign. She could have run against the gentleman who beat her in her last run for judge. This was a political decision and what some of these bloggers have to say is reality whether you like it or not. Don't participate if you can't contribute something to help us all make an educated decision.

    ReplyDelete
  86. If you consider your racist comments fodder that can help voters make educated decisions, you are just making senseless noise.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Georgia's opponent is distributing a pamhlet that says he's for safe streets. Well then why is law enforcement strongly behind Georgia Herrera? Because they know she understands the law and will apply it not bend it to let criminals walk free. Why is he claiming to be for safe streets, when he has no criminal law prosecution experience and no support from working police professionals? Because he's pandering to the voter.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Herrera has what it takes to be Racine's next judge. Her breadth and depth of experience as an attorney, a family court commissioner and a circuit court commissioner are what I am voting for!

    ReplyDelete
  89. I am supporting the candidate that will be tough on crime. As a lifelong Racine resident, I am looking for the candidate that will be fair, but tough on criminals. I would love to see Racine streets safer for all- Georgia Herrera is definitely the candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  90. It is the job of the police to be tough on crime.

    It is the job of judges to fairly deliberate the law as it pertains to each case and render a fair judgment. Supporters of Herrera like the ones above are basically saying she is going to support the police and that is the qualification that will make her a good judge.

    I strongly disagree. Kangaroo courts do not serve the people.

    NO CRONIES.

    ReplyDelete
  91. ASK THE SHERIFF AND POLICE CHIEF IF GENE ASKED FOR THEIR ENDORSEMENT!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  92. I have known both Georgia and her opponent for years, this is an easy decision. Georgia has nearly 11 years of experience teaching constitutional law, experience as an assistant da, a private practice attorney and a court commissioner. SHe has the right experience and the integrity for this role.

    ReplyDelete
  93. 10:31 - if she is so good, how come she could not answer one question the JT's posed. Her responses were embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete
  94. I felt Georgia did a good job answering the questions, honestly. She will not try to litigate from the bench, and she exhibited a full understanding of the law. It's perception, if her opponent has the answers, then go support him instead of focusing on Georgia. Your interest in Georgia shows that you have interest and confidence in her skills and abilities if you ask me!!!

    ReplyDelete
  95. As a former Racine County prosecutor, Georgia knows the law. Her experience is unmatched. Georgia has what it takes to uphold the law in a fair and balanced manner.

    ReplyDelete
  96. There are quite a few attorneys in Racine who come to my mind that have more experience than Georgia and one of them is her opponent Gene. Where were all of you Georgia supporters when she lost her last run as judge? And if you are so sure of her victory than why isn't she running against her opponent from her last run for judge? I can answer that because she didn't think she would have an opponent.

    ReplyDelete