Sunday, April 16, 2006
Weinsheim: No Lawyer
I just received an email from Amy Weinsheim. She said she did not have a lawyer at the recount: "I never contacted any lawyers nor did I have a lawyer at the recount with me--not once, not one." In addition to her 11-month-old daughter Lola, the people who were there with her at various times were: her mother, her husband, Karen Bowen, Teresa Thiel, Janey Robson, and Jerry Steger (stepfather). Her mom believes that because Jerry came to the recount from work wearing a suit and looking distinguished, someone assumed that he was a lawyer.
I teach Communication Studies (First Amendment, Classical Rhetoric, Civic Engagement, Rhetoric of Rock Music) at UW Oshkosh. Served two terms on Oshkosh City Council. Originally from Brooklyn, NY.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
So happy to know Amy did not engage the services of an attorney. I am not sure WHY I am happy but I am. It seems to me that coming armed to the teeth to a recount conducted by able servants of the public borders on some sort of primal fear.
Might a person who DID bring a lawyer let out a scream if the tension rose too high? (You remember "the primal scream" don't you?) Might that person react in an inappropriate manner in tight situations?
Seems to me that could be the result of having too much invested in an endeavor such as this.One wonders what drives a candidate to care so much when everyone goes into an election knowing that as there are winners so must there also be losers.
So I am pleased that Amy went alone to face the decision...her loneness mitigated merely by family and a friend or two.
As to the conclusions leaped to by some, well they should know that some folks are willing to take things as they come. Even school board elections and the will of the people.
In closing may I say that I became acquainted with Teresa Thiel several years ago and I know of no one who is more dedicated to the needs and welfare of the students of Oshkosh. She is a tireless worker for the good of all our children. It is insulting to the quality of her contributions and her work to insinuate that she would go through papers that were not her own in empty offices where she did not belong. I would hope an apology would be quick in coming.
Thank you citizen, I doubt there will be any apology and it wouldn't be genuine if there was... I do hope that reader NOW realize that these NOTES by Mrs. Monte do have errors and mistakes and misinformation so please readers, wait for the OFFICIAL minutes rather than notes by someone who does not always get what is going on recorded accurately... ie Mrs. Weinsheim had a lawyer, there was voter fraud in the town of Utica... actually there was an allegation by Mr. Becker of voter fraud in the town of Vinland and Mrs. Monte also had it wrong as to which ballot the voter wanted and which he got... read Bethany Warner's story in the NW from April 14 and you will see that her story matches what I wrote previously and that Mrs. Monte's account was full of errors.
Teresa Thiel
Didn't Mrs. Monte also state somewhere that the Northwestern referenced a Weinsheim attorney? I think I've seen most of the stories from the ONW but don't recall reading that. But it's funny Mrs. Monte would reference them when she's chastised them throughout the recount process for less than adequate coverage.
I also stated that the notes I was publishing were from a number of sources, but if you would like to heap the blame on me for mistakes, feel free.
Apparently "Citizen" was in the room. Please explain the "primal scream" as it would seem the only screaming was done by little Lola when needing to be fed. As for inapropriate responses, BOTH candidates had their moments of lax judgement, rudness, immaturity, and frustration. Can you explain why Amy was so curt when I tried to talk to her about her daughter? I am assuming it was stress. After all we have not talked much, so how could we know each other enough to be openly rude. How do you think you would do under the pressures of the recount? It is easy to judge from the audience what it feels like to be on stage.
I also see in your post that Dan is wrong for caring so much about the future of our students and this community. Shame on him for that. Apparently blase attitudes and no emotional or personal investment are valued in this community? Apparently electoral rights are not valued, either voter's or candidate's. What a pity for those of us who do care. I guess, I should just leave it to the tax and spenders to run things.
I wonder if the roles were reversed if the same flippant comments would be made about Amy by the same people. The "loneness" comment was touching, really.
As for knowing or not knowing Teresa Thiel, there was a time I tried to get to know her. I knew she had experience and knowledge, though I did not know the quality of it. I introduced myself and tried to strike up conversations on several occasions a while back. I was met with comments I took to indicate she was trying to talk me out of running for school board. She was all smiles to my face and congenial and then accusatory and rude on blogs. Since I prefer people with one face, I no longer tried to "get to know" her as Citizen has. If she is so selfless and community-minded, I wouldn't know. The icey wall was enough of a deterent.
There were no accusations of going through papers in empty offices. While she may be a paragon who would never peak at what is on a desk while chatting with "busy" district administrators, others would. It does not excuse her behavior or that of the Superintendent for allowing it and encouraging it. Shall I apologize for insulting Mrs. Thiel's integrity? I have been given nothing to indicate she has any except the word of an anonymous "Citizen" who may have questionable credentials, and alterior motives, as far as anyone knows.
I will, however, extend you both the courtesy of accepting your opinions and valuing the fact that you would publically express them. I doubt I will be given the same courtesy by either of you. I will make this suggestion, if you don't like my efforts to promote communication, don't read them. There is nothing forcing anyone to click on links and read those words. If you would like to refute anything, take your own notes and publish them. I can only assume you don't because communication is not important to you. Good Day to you all.
No, Michelle, the majority of us in this community value communication. What you trade in is innuendo, rumor, character assasination and snide comments. That does not, and hopefully never will, consititute "communication".
Veiled accusations do not equal "questions", and self-righteous sensationalism does not equal "communication".
Michelle, why do you think someone who you openly criticize at board meetings and at candidates forums and in blogs (Mrs. Weinsheim) would want to strike up a conversation with you about her daughter? People are not interested in fake friendliness. You may like others with "one face" yet you yourself feign friendliness only to attack again and again.
I don't have a clue what you are talking about where I tried to "talk you out of running" I have barely had any verbal conversations with you, we have gone back and forth on the blogs. I have been civil to you but that is all, I have distanced myself from you because I do not want to associate with people who in public forums constantly criticize those who serve our district and our students.
Oh, and if the roles were reversed, there would not have been a recount, Amy would not have asked for one. Though as I have stated in several postings, I did not begrudge Mr. Becker asking for a recount, I do take issue with how it has played out, with the goal seeming to be throwing out as many votes as possible, many on (in Mr. Becker's own words) "a technicality".
These types of comments in her NOTES from the recount are just a few examples of Mrs. Monte's continual efforts to portray people in a poor light and make something out of nothing.
"Teresa and Amy both at ballot table though Amy gave permission for Teresa to speak while she breastfed her baby at the table. Recount rules are only one person allowed to speak: either candidate OR representative." WHO CARES WHERE MRS. WEINSHEIM FED HER CHILD AND WHY DOES MRS. MONTE THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR US TO HAVE?
"Ward 25 and 26
Heilmann walked up to Monte to deliver a letter. Dan was standing in conversation with Monte. Heilmann did not look at nor speak to Dan and has not to this point during the course of proceedings. Has spent part(s) of every day talking to Amy and her supporters. This is the "boss" of canvassers."
SOUR GRAPES BECAUSE HE DIDN'T TALK TO PEOPLE MRS. MONTE LIKES?
Is it appropriate for the Superintendent of Schools to be chatting with one sitting school board member and ignoring another sitting school board member through the course of entire week to the point of publically, and seemingly intentionally, ignoring one? Since, theoretically, the school board is his boss, that is disrespectful and ill-mannered to say the least.
The superintendent is human too and when you observe the way people are being treated you too might decide you don't want to engage in conversation with someone who is, now how did Mr. Fitzhenry put it... menacing...
Of course the School Super is going to kiss the a-- of the board members who always vote in favor of his spending measures and rarely question anything staff requests. Those who question spending are tagged as "agianst the kids" and much worse. Good luck with this group Mr. Traska. Pick your side, your either for or against the kids.
I do truly consider the previous posting vile. Why bring such vulgar references into a public discussion? I suspect Dr. H. was gravitating toward an area that seemed most friendly. Simple as that. Perhaps he even likes babies.
Questioning spending is NOT the issue. Questioning is good but the stance of so many, including,I would argue, Mr. Becker, is that of a gatekeeper whose sole duty is to fend off everything but the basics...and sometimes even them.
There is more to serving the district than saying "NO!!!" at every opportunity. There are many things to consider and to weigh. Earning the reputation of being anti-child takes more than a string of discenting votes. It, rather, is a mind-set that telegraphs itself through body language and comments. Sometimes it tells the public that the heart of the board menber is elsewhere and that he marches to a drummer other than the needs of our youngest. Sometimes the message is that the board member lacks vision or interest in gaining one. Most of us know that bean counting is but one of the things necessary to create fine schools...and it isn't even one of the most important.
May I make one further comment. Elsewhere it was stated that Mrs. Thiel "may be a paragon who would never peek at something on a desk..."
Personally I do not consider keeping one's eyes to yourself the mark of a paragon. It is simple polite decency. I was taught the concept well before I was ten.
Those who do otherwise are, indeed, sad cases. Until "caught in the act" I would assume that all adults respect the privacy of institutions and of others. I would never assume anyone was taking advantage of a situation to spy or gain private knowledge.
The whole idea is offensive.
While the idea is offensive, there are those who would take advantage. That is just a generalization, not meant to be pointed at anyone in particular. The world can be an awful place at times, and it is difficult to know who you can trust.
Well, in that case it certainly is a good thing we have Michelle Monte to rely upon the final arbiter of who is and who is not a decent and trustworthy individual.
It seems to me that most people would not assume someone talking to a person in his office would be there to as Mrs. Monte said "peak at what is on a desk while chatting with 'busy' district administrators..." I can only assume that is something Mrs. Monte and New Voice would do since they are so quick to accuse others of doing so...
That's creative. Turn the argument around to attempt to prove a point. That would be called circular logic. It gets you no where fast. I would think with that kind of witty reparte, anonymous would "come out of the closet."
If anonymous 11:32 is such a great judge of people's character, why doesn't anonymous run for office. We could use some intelligence in the council and BOE. You should really consider it though you might wnat to rethink the anonymous part. But clearly you are an expert on many issues and character traits. Please, oh please, consider saving all our souls at the next election.
I think anonymouses 2:20 and 2:23 would be QUITE SURPRISED to learn who their nemesis anonymous is. Since one can never be quite sure who is posting one would be well-advised to hold back with your own witty reparte and refrain from assumptions that clearly would put the "ASS" in the word.
You can put any name you want on the ballot. Why wouldn't someone want to run under anonymous, it works so well here.
I wonder what anonymous 4:31 is ASSuming???
If you look at the various comments it's clear there were different ASSumptions. Take your pick.
Chezhead, Target, Irate in Oshkosh, Mad as Hell, so on and so forth...They're all part of a small Oshkosh political clique.
Yup, right along with Sitting in the Weeds, Helena, Melanie Bloechl, Paul Esslinger, and the Montes.
Post a Comment