Man asked a capitol cop a question, arrested for obstructing an officer

Update: Some anonymous soul obtained a permit, the Solidarity Singers went outside as they do when another event is planned.

So, naturally the police arrested a man, Ed Kuharski, anyway for asking a question of some GOP capitol cop named (Mitch): The charge is obstructing an officer.

Worth noting is the incapacity of some—the Wisconsin Blogging Blue site and ex-Madison mayor Dave Cieslewicz—to comprehend the scope of the social engineering project engaged by the GOP's Walker, Erwin and Huebsch.

Despite some some two years of evidence of GOP duplicity and GOP attempts to quell non-GOP political activity in voting, in worker organizing, consumer protection, legal protection and access to the capitol and too much more, Blogging Blue and Cieslewicz remain not so hot on defending freedom of political expression, denying in effect the history of the Wisconsin capitol as an open space for cultural and political gatherings.

Advise Blogging Blue and Cieslewicz at least to peruse histories of the Wisconsin capitol, architectural histories, structural reports, and cultural histories, as well as the published justification for restoration funds and so forth.

But Democrats being Democrats, group think and shallow bureaucratic thinking is the order of the day for the timid and not particularly well-read.

And to Ed Kuharski, this is for you:

Wisconsin Solidarity Schooled Scott Walker's Cops and Dave Cieslewicz

Solidarity Sing Along

Now that Scott Walker's cops have been put in their place by the Wisconsin community; viz: Walking, talking and observing is not grounds for arrest no matter what David Erwin, Walker's cop-in-chief believes, it's worth noting who in Madison besides Walker and Erwin blew this one.

Madison's ex-Mayor, Dave Cieslewicz screwed up again.

Cieslewicz has been hostile to the Solidarity Sing Along since 2011.

Faced with Walker and Erwin's escalating assault against free speech, Cieslewicz wrote in late July: "So, the singers had a couple of options. They could have kept their numbers below twenty or they could have gotten a permit. They chose to do neither I guess out of a sense of some sort of principle."

In a constitutional democracy, there are many more things in heaven and earth than dreamt of in Cieslewicz' politics.

Three points:

The singers are an organic group; no one knows who is going to show up. Often, it's just families with children watching and listening to the singing for a few minutes, applauding, laughing and passing through. Erwin of course wanted to arrest them too.

The second point is that Cieslewicz knows perfectly well the organic nature of this ever-changing group, in a word. Folks believe they have the right to walk to the capitol, express their thoughts and leave. This is what Cieslewicz derides as "some sort of principle."

Finally, Cieslewicz also knows perfectly well that if some other group has an event the singers will move outside and sing songs, a fact ignored by GOP media such as the Wisconsin State Journal ... and Cieslewicz.

As Republicans, with some rhetorical help from Cieslewicz, continue their appalling effort to cleanse Wisconsin history of the capitol as an open space, the people's cultural and political gathering area, one wonders what Cieslewicz has in mind for his next run at public office. 
---
Just how around-the-bend were Erwin and Walker's cops?

See Officer Michael J. Syphard grab videographer Arthur Kohl-Riggs and throw him to the ground and inexplicably scream at him. Cieslewicz finds Kohl-Riggs "annoying," just as Syphard apparently does.

Former Madison Mayor 'Dave' Says Scott Walker Is Right to Block Judge Appointments

Former "Mayor Dave" Knows Better Than Dane County Voters, He Says in Incoherent Column

Former Madison, Wisconsin, Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, is upset that Dane County voters decided not to vote for the Scott Walker appointee for judge in the April 2 election, as is Scott Walker.

Cieslewicz, like Walker, omits mention in his public comments that the Wisconsin Constitution guarantees voters have the final say on whom they elect as circuit court judges.

But Cieslewicz, like Walker, says he knows better than the voters, and they just didn't think this election through correctly.

Writes Cieslewicz:  "Look, I don't like the use of the Walker factor in these races. It brought down Judge Roger Allen a year ago, a good man who I worked with as an assistant city attorney. And this time around it brought down Rebecca St. John, who many attorneys that I respect told me was doing a very good job as an appointed judge."

Let's get Cieslewicz' position, such as it is, clear.

We need a change in judicial appointment procedure, you see, because Cieslewicz and Walker know better than voters; many attorneys told Cieslewicz that St. John was doing a fine job as judge, deserving of re-election though, Cieslewicz also points out, he endorsed St. John's opponent.

What?

Mayor Dave, it's becoming clear why you are the former mayor.

Now, Cieslewicz says, like Walker, that the governor should "appoint a panel of retired judges to make the (judicial) appointment on his behalf," because voters cannot be trusted to make the correct choice in voting for or against Scott Walker appointees for Dane County judge. In fact, let's do this in every county, counsels Cieslewicz.

Voters did not engage the correct calculus that Cieslewicz presumes to know in electing a circuit court judge, though again since he says he endorsed St. John's opponent, Rhonda Lanford, that calculus is elusive. Actually, Cieslewicz' calculus is incoherent.

This animus toward the democratic system of representative government that Scott Walker exhibits is apparently catching on, and Cieslewicz is either wrong-headed, disdainful of representative government, or cynically and ineptly angling for another run at some public office, or currying favor with the GOP.

What he is not doing is making a whole lot of sense.

But the Wisconsin Constitution remains, irrespective of what Cieslewicz or Walker may wish:

Wisconsin Constitution, Article VII. Judiciary (Section 7. [Circuit court: election.]:

For each circuit there shall be chosen by the qualified electors thereof one or more circuit judges as prescribed by law. Circuit judges shall be elected for 6-year terms and shall reside in the circuit from which elected. ...

If Cieslewicz doesn't trust the voters to make the proper decisions on judgeships, advocate repealing Article VII and the annoying section that pertains to voters electing judges in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin State Journal takes this position.

Cieslewicz is not arrogant, or maybe he is.

But Cieslewicz is pathetic in his assertion that he votes for candidates for the correct reasons, whereas voters elect candidates for the wrong reasons, as divined by Cieslewicz and Walker.

By the way, I voted for Rhonda Lanford, because I am a constitutionally qualified elector who decided that St. John either lied or was truthful on her application for judge in which St. John spouted rightwing platitudes echoing Walker's (what Lester Pines called rightwing "dog whistles") in an apparent effort to get the gig. Besides, I believe Lanford to be a brilliant jurist, and the best candidate for the position.