"They're not censoring me.... Uh, they're censoring Amendment E. Yes, yes, that's it. That rotten judge is censoring Amendment E"

By -
Got a series of comments under posts on the No-on-E web log that Tim Gebhart and I contribute to that appeared in one of my e-mail boxes. And they were kind of odd:
Is that why a State Judge issued an order censoring a website for amendment E?
The site is all court documents that are damaging to him and his star chamber.
http://southdakotagov.info/6.html
order in part at bottom of page
Well, I knew it was spam, but just in case, I bit on it and gave it a shot. I knew the website from prior South Dakota related web surfing, but in case there was actually something related to Amendment E, I wanted to check it out. Here's what the comment author is referring to:


Oh yeah, "that guy." Interfering with the publicity of Amendment E? No. Interfering with a years long campaign of harassment? Yes.

It's not very difficult to see that the only thing Judge Rusch spanked Michael Wagner on is his single minded pursuit of the continual harassment of his ex-wife. In fact, if you go to the website at http://southdakotagov.info/index.html, it's pretty apparent that it has nothing to do with Amendment E, except for the small blurb on page 4.

I would encourage you to go review the website. Because in my opinion, this is the kind of person that supports Amendment E. Someone who intends to use Amendment E to twist the legal system and try to force the use of the judiciary as something to beat his enemies over the head with. In this case, his enemy is his ex-wife.

Now imagine a hundred 'Michaels' or 'Michelles' all saying that the juducuary is ignoring the evidence that they think should be heard. Regardless of it's applicability or legality. Validity won't matter, just emotion. And that's a scary future for South Dakotans.

That's what we'll face if Amendment E passes.

Actually, I would also point out that Michael Wagner and the Amendment E people clearly have a few things in common aside from his support of them. Things such as not wanting to follow the rules.

Like Bill Stegmeier's outstanding sales tax, and Amendment E's continued lack of a proper filing with the Secretary of State's office, Michael Wagner also has yet to comply with the request of the judge.

The judge's order says "Respondent shall not place any information about petitioner on any internet websites, and he shall immediately remove all information pertaining to petitioner from any existing website." And despite the judge's protection order, it hasn't happened yet, and Mr. Wagner's campaign of harassment continues.

Although, in this case I don't think that the judge will need the prodding of an Amendment E to make sure the law is obeyed. At least we hope not for the sake of the ex-Mrs Wagner.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Wow... that guy is obsessed. I can see why there's a protection order against him. If you can make it through his fragmented harangue, check out the letters from the Judicial Qualifications Commission dismissing his complaints and the Supreme Court Order listing the documents he filed and calling them "incomprehensible, illegible, frivolous and wholly without merit." Those tell the story...
2:19 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on
Read more