WFA PAC endorses Reilly in District II Appeals race

Today Wisconsin Family Action PAC announced endorsement of Judge Paul Reilly in the District II Court of Appeals race:

Madison—Wisconsin Family Action Political Action Committee (WFA PAC) announced today that it has endorsed Judge Paul Reilly for the open seat on Wisconsin’s District II Court of Appeals for the upcoming Spring General Election on Tuesday, April 6.

District II Court of Appeals includes the counties of Calumet, Fond du Lac, Green Lake, Kenosha, Manitowoc, Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Walworth, Washington, Waukesha, and Winnebago.

“Judge Paul Reilly has the most important quality necessary for a judge—a commitment to the role of a judge as interpreting and applying the law as it is written, not making law from the bench. He brings both experience and respect for the law and the separation of powers to this key judicial position,” said Julaine Appling, WFA PAC director.

Judge Reilly is currently a judge on the Waukesha County Circuit Court. Also running for District II Court of Appeals is Judge Linda Van de Water.

-30-
Authorized and paid for by Wisconsin Family Action PAC, Judith Brant, Treasurer. Not authorized by any candidate or by any candidate’s agent or committee.

Click here for the PDF of the announcement.

Advertisements

11 comments on “WFA PAC endorses Reilly in District II Appeals race

  1. a mom says:

    This is surprising. What about Van De Water? She seemed to be getting all the conservative endorsements.

  2. EastsideGal says:

    “all the conservative endorsements”? Wow — no way.

    Just compare the endorsements listed on each candidates’ website. Judge Paul Reilly clearly has far more endorsements, from a wide variety of people — judges, law enforcement-types, and regular people.

    Looks to me like he’s the best candidate in this race.

  3. a mom says:

    Eastside Gal:

    No, you can’t really tell from the endorsements. Reilly has Mark Gundrum (that’s good) but Van De Water has Scott Walker (that’s good, too). The other political endorsements seem split down the middle … I recognize good (conservative) names on each side. However, looking at Van De Water’s FB page, she has Mark Nuemann, Americans for Prosperity, Wisconsin Right to Life, and Paul Ryan, among many others whose opinion I respect.

    It would have been helpful if WFA had given more reasons for their endorsement.

    As it is, I’m going to have to vote for Van De Water, based purely on endorsements.

  4. a dad says:

    Why would anybody want to have a conservative for a judge? Look at the mess conservatives got us into in the last 9 years. They talk a good game, but they never deliver. Indeed, they almost do the opposite of what they preach. They say peace, and give us war. They say fiscal constraint, and spend like crazy. They say high moral values, and they take campaign money to strip clubs. It makes no sense at all.

  5. a mom says:

    Wrong, A Dad! We’ve had REPUBLICANS doing those stupid things, NOT conservatives!! What we need are real conservatives, who are on the side of liberty, fiscal restraint, and moral values. Unfortunately, Republicans have too often sold us down the river on the really important issues.

    Please don’t make the mistake of confusing Republicans with Conservaties. I am a conservative; I am a Tea Party Patriot; I am a Pro-Life Patriot; that doesn’t always mean the same as “Republican”.

    And don’t give me that stupid “strip club” talking point. I heard it this morning from some liberal chick on the news. too. Did Axelrod send out the memo telling all liberals to use that against Republicans? Give me a break. All decent people are disgusted by the stupidity of those who went to the strip club, but believe me, NOBODY would be dumb enough to confuse the RNC with conservatives!!

  6. MaryKate Dawson says:

    I am Paul’s sister and profamily (my husband and I have 6 children) and we homeschool. Paul requested that we not bash Linda in anyway or form, he would win on his honesty and his record. Which he did!! But I now can say that Linda used Scott Walker and Paul Ryan endorsement without their permission and Paul Ryan even said so and supported Paul verbally and in appearences. Paul is a family man who has been married to wonderful women for 25 years and has two outstanding daughters who are both attending college. He is prolife, profamily, and a true believer in the constitution. If you go back to the information you will find that Linda spent her time smearing Paul, she never told you about herself (her personal life is something she refused to mention.) Please understand you have the most honest, respectable, hard working conservatives Judge we could ask for.

  7. a mom says:

    It occurred to me after my last comment here that we’d probably be OK if either candidate won, considering that each seemed to have some very good endorsements… so I wasn’t too worried about the outcome.

    Now that I read your comment, however, I am VERY thankful that Paul won!! That is disgusting that Van De Water used false endorsements. What about WI Right to Life? Was that a real or fake endorsement? And in the future, I hope that more information is provided; if candidates are using false endorsements, that info needs to be spread on EVERY website and in every endorsement made by others.

    Anyway, again, I’m very glad Paul won! And also very glad that Mark Gundrum won. We are desperately going to need good judges, considering the horrible laws being passed at state and federal levels. Eventually some of these laws are going to have to be tested for constitutionality — and we’ll need sound judges to make those decisions.

    MaryKate — I’m also a homeschool mom. 🙂

    • julaineappling says:

      Mary Kate – We understand your earlier comment about wishing you had more details from WFA PAC regarding our reason(s) for endorsing Judge Paul Reilly. Just a couple of things about that. First, we tell candidates that both the personal interview and the completed survey are strictly confidential–and we want to be sure we always respect that. Second, we do have criteria that we have established by which we make our decision, in keeping with who we are as an organization–pro-family, pro-marriage, pro-life, pro-limited government, pro-capitalism, pro-liberty, etc. Such criteria include judicial philosophy, judicial temperament, judicial track record (if there is one), personal background information, etc. We want to respect the confidentiality we have promised and yet at the same time communicate that we have fully vetted candidates before we endorse (including additional research we conduct)–and vetted them consistent with who we are and with established criteria. Also, because we endorse one candidate doesn’t mean that we are trying to sabotage another candidate. So, it’s really quite an interesting balancing act. I hope this explanation is helpful in a historic sense on this past Tuesday’s races, but more importantly for future elections in which we will most definitely be doing candidate endorsements. We appreciate your input as we continue on the tightrope.

  8. a mom says:

    Julianne – that was my comment, not Mary Kate’s, but thanks for the reply anyway. You just earned some credibility with me, since it turns out after the fact that your endorsement was definitely on target. In the future, I will be more inclined to go with your endorsements rather than others.

    I’m still curious as to why Wisconsin Right to Life endorsed Van De Water — or maybe that was a “fake” endorsement too. I suppose I should ask WI RTL.

  9. EastsideGal says:

    a mom: It’s a week later & doesn’t matter, but I just checked the Van De Water FB page. I don’t see where it says she had the endorsement of “Mark Nuemann, Americans for Prosperity, Wisconsin Right to Life.” Do you mean people listed under “fans”? If so, that’s a far cry from endorsing her. But I’d be interested in seeing what you’re saying are endorsements from those people & organizations.

  10. a mom says:

    You’re right; I apologize. She lists herself as a fan of those organizations, and in my quick look at the page (after also looking at the supporters she lists on her website), I thought those people were listed as being fans of hers. Rather, she is a fan of those people/organizations, which of course doesn’t mean the feeling is mutual. So, I withdraw my statement that Van De Water claimed an endorsement from WI RTL.

    I usually do a ton of research on candidates for office (even asking aldermanic candidates their opinion on abortion, which always throws them for a loop as they don’t expect that question!) but in this case, I didn’t do enough.

    Again, I’m very glad that Paul won.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s