FREDERICA FREYBERG:

THE RACE FOR THE STATE SUPREME COURT HEATED UP THIS WEEK OVER A BLAZE OF WORDS. WORDS WRITTEN BY ONE CANDIDATE WHEN SHE WAS A COLLEGE STUDENT AT MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY IN 1992. THAT’S WHEN INCUMBENT JUSTICE REBECCA BRADLEY WROTE SCHOOL NEWSPAPER EDITORIALS, INCLUDING ONE WHERE SHE DESCRIBED HOMOSEXUALITY AS ABNORMAL. SHE DESCRIBED PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON AS QUEER LOVING AND THOSE WHO VOTED FOR HIM AS BEING EITHER TOTALLY STUPID OR ENTIRELY EVIL. THIS WEEK JUSTICE BRADLEY ISSUED AN APOLOGY FOR THOSE WORDS AND OTHERS. SHE SAID TO THOSE OFFENDED BY MY COMMENTS I MADE AS A YOUNG COLLEGE STUDENT, I APOLOGIZE AND ASSURE YOU THAT THOSE COMMENTS ARE NOT REFLECTIVE OF MY WORLD VIEW. BRADLEY SAID IN A STATEMENT, THESE COMMENTS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO I AM AS A PERSON OR A JURIST AND THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUES FACING THE VOTERS OF THIS STATE. ON THURSDAY, MORE TROUBLE FOR THE BRADLEY CAMPAIGN, WITH A MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL STORY MAKING SPLASHY HEADLINES. JUSTICE BRADLEY AND HER OPPONENT, APPEALS COURT JUDGE JOANNE KLOPPENBURG, WILL DEBATE HERE IN OUR STUDIOS A WEEK FROM TONIGHT. BUT TONIGHT WE GO OVER THE RACE WITH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LIBERAL WATCHDOG GROUP THAT REVEALED BRADLEY’S COLLEGE WRITING, SCOT ROSS OF ONE WISCONSIN NOW. BILL MCCOSHEN IS A PARTNER IN THE MADISON-BASED LOBBYING FIRM CAPITOL CONSULTANTS AND A FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR GOVERNOR TOMMY THOMPSON. HE ALSO SERVED AS THOMPSON’S COMMERCE SECRETARY. WELCOME TO YOU BOTH WITH THAT VERY LONG INTRODUCTION.

SCOT ROSS AND BILL MCCOSHEN:

THANK YOU.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

ON THE ONE ISSUE, THOUGH, OF THE JOURNAL SENTINEL REPORTING ABOUT ETHICAL QUESTIONS AROUND BRADLEY REPRESENTING A MAN IN COURT AFTER SHE HAD HAD A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM, WITH THE HEADLINE INCLUDING BRADLEY EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR, TO BOTH OF YOU, IS THIS A DEAL FOR HER? I’LL START WITH YOU, SCOT ROSS.

SCOT ROSS:

WELL I THINK THIS. REBECCA BRADLEY HAS THROUGHOUT THIS CAMPAIGN SAID I’M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT I THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES. MY OPINION IS IRRELEVANT. TRUST MY LEGAL JUDGMENT. AND I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE WE CAN SEE THAT REBECCA BRADLEY’S LEGAL JUDGMENT IS SUSPECT, AT BEST. I THINK THERE’S A LOT OF SPLASH RELATED TO WHAT WAS GOING ON IN HER PERSONAL LIFE AND THAT’S BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT SHE SAID, THE THINGS THAT SHE WROTE THOSE MANY YEARS AGO. I THINK THAT’S WHY THERE’S A LOT OF ATTENTION BEING PAID TO THAT RIGHT NOW.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHAT DO YOU THINK? DO YOU THINK THIS IS A PARTICULARLY BAD DEAL FOR HER CAMPAIGN AT THIS MOMENT?

BILL MCCOSHEN:

I THINK IT'S SORT OF UNFORTUNATE TIMING BUT I ALSO THINK IT’S A SMEAR CAMPAIGN. HER OWN FORMER HUSBAND, HER EX-HUSBAND, SAID THAT THE HEADLINE WAS A LIE. THAT HE TALKED TO THE REPORTER AND TOLD HIM THAT MUCH AND HIS QUOTES WEREN’T EVEN IN THE STORY. I MEAN, AT WORST IT’S BAD REPORTING, YOU KNOW. IT’S A SMEAR CAMPAIGN ON THE PART OF ONE WISCONSIN NOW AND THE KLOPPENBURG CAMPAIGN TO TRY AND, YOU KNOW, DISCREDIT A CREDIBLE JURIST WHO’S DOING WELL. I MEAN THE REALITY IS THESE GUYS DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES IN THE RACE. THEY WANT TO FIND SOME DISTRACTION FOR VOTERS. BY THE WAY, I ACCEPT HER APOLOGY FOR THE EARLIER STATEMENTS. I KNOW WE’RE GOING TO GET TO THAT. I THINK VOTERS OUGHT TO, TOO.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

SO NOW YOU’RE ACCUSED OF A SMEAR CAMPAIGN.

SCOT ROSS:

I THINK THE ISSUES ARE WHAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED. WHAT ARE REBECCA BRADLEY’S POSITION ON THE ISSUES THAT WILL COME BEFORE THIS COURT LIKE LGBTQ ISSUES AND SUCH LIKE THAT. I THINK THE THING IS BEFORE THIS WEEK, REBECCA BRADLEY WAS UNQUALIFIED TO BE ON THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, AND THIS WEEK SHE BECAME DISQUALIFIED TO REMAIN ON THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WELL, NOW THE COLLEGE PAPER ARTICLES YOU REPORTED ON, WERE YOU SURPRISED BY JUSTICE REBECCA BRADLEY’S VENOM AGAINST GAYS AND LESBIANS AND OTHERS?

SCOT ROSS:

ABSOLUTELY. I JUST WANT TO POINT ONE THING OUT BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING WELL THIS IS 24 YEARS AGO. IN REBECCA BRADLEY’S TV ADS AS WELL AS WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR REFORM’S ADS THEY TALK ABOUT HER 20 YEARS OF LEGAL EXPERIENCE. SO UP TO YEAR 20 IS OKAY, BUT YEARS 21 THROUGH 24 ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE?

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

YOU SAY THAT ALL OF THAT IS NONSENSE.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

IT’S NONSENSE AND I’LL TELL YOU WHY. ALL OF US, ALL OF YOUR VIEWERS, PROBABLY YOU, DID SOME THINGS IN COLLEGE — DID OR SAID THINGS IN COLLEGE THAT YOU ARE NOT PROUD OF. THAT YOU WOULD TAKE BACK. THAT YOU’VE GROWN UP. MY GOODNESS WHEN I WAS A FRESHMAN, I THOUGHT I WAS A DEMOCRAT. WELL THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME, RIGHT? SO I THINK THE FACT THAT WE’RE DIGGING UP STUFF THAT SHE SAID WHEN SHE WAS A COLLEGE STUDENT 24 YEARS AGO IS BEYOND RIDICULOUS. IT HAS NO BEARING ON THIS RACE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHY CAN’T IT BE CHALKED UP TO YOUTHFUL INDISCRETION?

SCOT ROSS:

WELL I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS. SOME OF THOSE OPINIONS CONTINUE TO THIS DAY. I MEAN SHE WROTE A COLUMN IN 2006 THAT SAID CONTRACEPTION IS MURDER. WE SAW THE VENOMOUS WRITINGS SHE MADE ABOUT WOMEN ACCESSING THEIR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS IN THESE COLUMNS. WE ALSO SAW THE FACT THAT SHE SAID WOMEN HAVE A LEGITIMATE ROLE IN DATE RAPE. I MEAN THOSE ARE UGLY THINGS TO SAY. THEY’RE OUT OF TOUCH.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

BY THE WAY, THAT LAST COMMENT. BERNIE SANDERS SAID SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR WHEN HE WAS IN COLLEGE AND HE JUST WON THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY. LET’S HAVE THE SAME STANDARD FOR ALL CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE. IF SANDERS CAN SAY SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR, WHY ISN’T HE BEING HELD TO ACCOUNT BY THE SAME ORGANIZATION?

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE WORDS THAT USED IN SOME OF THOSE, LONG AGO, ALBEIT LONG AGO, EDITORIALS THAT SHE WROTE AT MARQUETTE, I MEAN SOME OF THE LANGUAGE WAS HARSH. DO YOU FEEL LIKE A SUPREME COURT CANDIDATE SHOULD BE HELD TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD?

BILL MCCOSHEN:

I THINK TIMING IS IMPORTANT HERE BECAUSE SHE HERSELF SAYS SHE’S EMBARRASSED BY THE LANGUAGE. I ACCEPT THAT. I WOULD BE EMBARRASSED IF I WERE HER. IT’S INTEMPERATE AT BEST AND PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING SHE WAS PROUD OF WHEN IT CAME OUT, AND SHE SAID AS MUCH. SO I DON’T THINK YOU CAN HOLD SOMEBODY ACCOUNTABLE FOR SOMETHING THEY DID 24 YEARS AGO WHEN THEY WERE A 20-YEAR-OLD COLLEGE STUDENT AND THEY’VE CHANGED. LIFE CHANGES ALL OF US. IF WE ALL HAD TO ACCOUNT FOR THE THINGS WE SAID AND DID IN COLLEGE, NONE OF US WOULD BE EMPLOYABLE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHAT ABOUT THAT ISSUE THAT SCOT WAS TALKING ABOUT THOUGH A MOMENT AGO WHICH AS TO DO WITH SOMETHING THAT SHE WROTE ABOUT IN 2006 HAVING TO DO WITH A CONSCIENCE CLAUSE WITH PHARMACISTS PRESCRIBING OR DISPENSING CONTRACEPTIVES? SHE DESCRIBED THOSE PHARMACISTS AS BEING PARTY TO MURDER. AND THAT WOULD THEN MAKE THE WOMAN RECEIVING THOSE CONTRACEPTIVES A MURDERER? WHAT ABOUT THOSE KINDS OF STATEMENTS?

BILL MCCOSHEN:

I DON’T BELIEVE SHE WAS A JUDGE AT THE TIME.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

SHE WASN’T.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

SHE WAS AN ATTORNEY. BUT THOSE ARE SORT OF CLOSER TO REALITY THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID IN HER CURRENT PROFESSION, ARE THINGS THAT OUGHT TO BE DEBATED IN THIS RACE. AND I THINK THAT’S FAIR GAME.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

LEGIT ISSUES.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

ABSOLUTELY.

SCOT ROSS:

IF I CAN JUST ADD ONE THING. REBECCA BRADLEY HAS BEEN USING THE SOME OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE GAY DEFENSE. WELL JUST FRIDAY DAVID CLARK SENT OUT AN EMAIL ON HER BEHALF TRYING TO RAISE MONEY. WHEN DAVID CLARK FOUND OUT ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT UPHOLDING GAY MARRIAGE IN 2015 THE SUMMER OF, HE SAID THAT WE SHOULD RAGE AND REVOLT AND GET PITCHFORKS AND DISPENSED HOMOPHOBIC LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO TRY AND GIN UP SUPPORT — AND OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE WERE GOING TO ALLOW SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. HE HAS BEEN A PROMINENT FUNDRAISER. SO IF REBECCA BRADLEY CAN USE THE SOME OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE GAY DEFENSE, THEN SHE SHOULD BE HELD TO ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE HOMOPHOBES.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

I DON’T THINK WE’RE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT HISTORY HERE. WISCONSIN VOTERS REJECTED SAME-SEX MARRIAGE OVERWHELMINGLY NOT THAT LONG AGO, TEN YEARS AGO. AND THE PENDULUM HAS SWUNG. AND IT’S SWUNG FAST. NOT JUST HERE, BUT ACROSS THE COUNTRY. I THINK YOU ARE SEEING PEOPLE WITH VERY DIFFERENT VIEWS IN A MUCH SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME THAN IT USED TO IN NORMAL NEWS CYCLE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

SCOT, ALL CANDIDATES FOR THE HIGH COURT SAY THEY CAN PUT ASIDE THEIR PERSONAL BELIEFS WHEN RENDERING DECISIONS INCLUDING HER CHALLENGER AND MANY WHO HAVE COME BEFORE. WHY CAN’T WE TRUST THAT JUSTICE BRADLEY CAN DO THAT AS WELL?

SCOT ROSS:

WELL, BECAUSE I DON’T THINK SHE HAS SHOWN — I DON’T THINK THAT REBECCA BRADLEY HAS SHOWN THAT SHE CAN BE TRUSTED. I THINK THAT’S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO. SHE’S BEEN ASKED ABOUT HER OPINION ON A WHOLE HOST OF ISSUES. SHE REFUSES TO SAY THEM. WE FIND INFORMATION OUT ABOUT THOSE MANY DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAT SHE’S PUT OUT THERE AND SHE TRIES TO DISCOUNT THEM. SHE SAYS I’VE ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS. TRUST MY JUDGMENT. BUT WE SEE HER JUDGMENT IS BAD ON A LOT OF THESE THINGS.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

EVERYTHING WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TODAY IS BEFORE SHE WAS A JUDGE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

RIGHT.

BILL MCCOSHEN:

SHE’S BEEN A JUDGE AT THREE DIFFERENT LEVELS OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY DECISION THAT SHE HAS MADE DURING THAT TIME. WE’RE TALKING ABOUT STUFF THAT WAS HAPPENING LONG BEFORE, IN SOME CASES A QUARTER OF A CENTURY BEFORE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

HAVING WORKED FOR A GOVERNOR YOURSELF, DO YOU THINK SHE SHOULD HAVE DIVULGED THESE WRITINGS TO THE GOVERNOR BEFORE HE APPOINTED HER?

BILL MCCOSHEN:

I THINK THE GOVERNOR’S SELECTION COMMITTEE–IT’S A FORMAL PROCESS. IT WAS FOR TOMMY THOMPSON. IT WAS FOR JIM DOYLE. IT WAS FOR SCOTT MACALLUM AND IT CERTAINLY IS FOR SCOTT WALKER. I THINK THE SELECTION PROCESS, THAT COMMITTEE COULD HAVE DONE A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB IN INFORMING THE GOVERNOR. THIS WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN THE GOVERNOR’S RESPONSIBILITY TO FIND ALL THESE THINGS BY HIMSELF. THERE’S A PROCESS IN PLACE FOR THAT AND I THINK THEY COULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WE NEED TO LEAVE IT THERE. SCOT ROSS, BILL MCCOSHEN.