Fighting over posters... it's like something that would happen in a dorm room

But it happened in the Wisconsin legislative assembly.

"This is a sham," cried Brett Hulsey.

I read that aloud and Meade went "Sham! Sham! Sham!" — which is amusing if you know your Wisconsin protest references. (If you don't, look at this and this and this.)

A Madison modus operandi.

I hesitate to reveal an approach to victimizing women in Madison....

A Saudi Arabian man who police say has returned to his country was charged with attempted sexual assault Tuesday after he allegedly talked his way in to a neighbor's apartment in Madison last month.

The July 4 incident was one of three within five days in July in which Riyad M. Alsulaiman, 24, allegedly approached women who had cats and asked to pet them in order to get into their apartments, all in the 1600 block of Fordem Avenue.

Let's retune those stranger-danger sensors. Elsewhere in the annals of getting creeped out in Madison, we've got our legislator, Brett Hulsey subjected to a disorderly conduct charge, because his horseplay with and photography of some kids at the beach creeped out the adults who were watching from a distance.

WDTY's Sly confronts Wisconsin legislator Brett Hulsey about the beach incident involving 3 children...

... which led to a charge of disorderly conduct, to which he pled "no contest."

Though both Sly and Hulsey are Madison lefties — click the tags below — Sly does a tough interview, with the refrain: People are "creeped out."

Hulsey has some stock phrases he repeats: it was "a potentially dangerous situation" (a boy was splashing 2 "little girls"), he'd been out in the "extreme heat" and wanted to "cool off,"  the splashing was "wild," "I admit I made a mistake," he "startled" the boy, in "a foot of water," the police officers "didn't write down a word" of his story, and he was "flabbergasted" that they wrote him a ticket. He tries to frame the story in terms of police abuse, and Sly practically shouts him down: Then why did you plead no contest?!

Hulsey's voice sounds whiny and sporadically spikes to a high pitch. He hedges about whether he flipped the boy's innertube over, but seems to concede it in the end.

Hulsey keeps saying he was not taking photographs of the children but of the sunset, but here's the location of the beach. Would that be a sunset vantage point on July 4th? The police report doesn't seem to have even the approximate time of the incident [says the incident took place at 7:24 PM. Sunset occurred at 8:40 PM. Would children be playing by themselves in the lake at that hour? [ADDED: It wasn't 8:40, but more than an hour before sunset. I'm still surprised that children would be allowed to swim in the lake at that time (or really anytime) without closer supervision.]

(Here's the Isthmus article that Sly refers to. Here's our discussion a few days ago about the incident.)

Hulsey is the Democratic candidate for the Wisconsin state assembly — in my district. The incident occurred on July 4th, but the first we heard of the story was when the Isthmus story came out on August 29th. The primary was August 14th, and Hulsey is, conveniently, unopposed in the general election. Nice timing.

ADDED: Rereading the police report, I get the impression that Hulsey was trying to play with the children. The children said that Hulsey had his "arms up off to his sides and his mouth was wide open but making no sound" — as if he was "trying to sneak up" on the boy. According to the report, "Brett then 'shocked' [the boy] out of his inflatable so that he fell into the water." His hands touched the inflatable and the boy, and the man and the boy started splashing each other, with Hulsey saying "something to the effect of 'do you want to have a splash fight with me?'"

That sounds like a man trying to play with kids. The boy was "happy" at first, but soon felt "confused," according to one of the girls (as reported by the police), and the girl said that made her feel "strange" because she "didn't really know what he could do."

Now, that sounds awkward, and you can think about how creepy it is and whether you'd call the police if your kids told you about a man doing that (and then taking photographs). But here's the thing: If he was trying to play, why doesn't he say that? Why does he say over and over that he was dealing with "a potentially dangerous situation"?

If a man dares to horse around with children he doesn't know... he could get into trouble.

Look what happened to Madison's Brett Hulsey, who just pled "no contest" to a disorderly conduct charge for —as the police put it — "the totality of the events that happened," mostly "engaging in horseplay with a child who is a stranger to him -- in the water, no less."

According to Hulsey, he chided a boy about splashing some girls and then, as he walked past him, shouted "boo" — causing the boy to roll off his inner tube into shallow water.

Supposedly, this creeped out the parents and grandparents. The mother, according to the police reports "worried if this individual may have done this before or may do more in the future."

Why not fight the charge? Hulsey says he wants to "move on." Does that work in a political career?

There are many old posts on this blog about Brett Hulsey, who represents my district in the state legislature and was a prominent figure in the 2011 Wisconsin protests. Here he is saying "boo" to Meade:



ADDED: Part of "the totality of the events" was photographing the children. Is that wrong? Here's some discussion of that topic:

1. "A pair of photographers began taking pictures of a large group of kids swimming in the Frog Pond at Boston Common when they were told they were not allowed." ("If I am on assignment covering a parade or some type of event, I photograph kids if I see a cool picture, but then I try to talk to the parents and hand them my card and even show them the photo, not that I have to, but I really don’t want to be labeled a pedophile.")

2. "Parents Forbidden From Photographing Own Kids At Public Pool."

3. "Is it ok to post pictures of other people's kids on the internet?" ("Yesterday I ended up in a conversation with a stranger on Facebook in which she said that she took pictures of her kids and their friends at events like her kids' birthday parties and posted them on Facebook for her friends to see. I was gobsmacked...")

4. "Posting Photos of Other People’s Children." ("We all take photos at school plays, sporting events, graduations, whatever our children are involved with.... But do we have the right to impose our decisions about what is public and private on other people’s children?")

"Reclaim Women’s Equality" rally at the Wisconsin Capitol draws only 100 people.

"Wendi Kent... had hoped enough would attend to encircle the Capitol...."

She said she invited Republican and Democratic state lawmakers. She told me a representative from Madison Rep. Brett Hulsey’s office was the only one who responded, to say he couldn’t attend.

Good old Brett Hulsey. At least he responded!

I love this picture of what "I am woman, hear me roar" looks like in Wisconsin nowadays.

One year ago today at the Wisconsin protests: a ragtag band plays and suddenly we have our encounter...

... with our assemblyman, Brett Hulsey, who'd been avoiding Meade.

One year ago today at the Wisconsin protests: there's a Planned Parenthood rally...

... and Meade's efforts to talk to our Assemblyman Brett Hulsey are aborted.

One year ago today at the Wisconsin protests: Meade gets a legislator to admit he lets a protester store her signs in his office.

It's Brett Hulsey, the assemblyman for our district:

Meade [to Hulsey]: "So, you're not only approving, but you're facilitating?"

The woman: "He's not facilitating. I only just asked him if I can, I said, I come here with signs. I just asked him if I could store the signs in his office overnight and he told me I could."

There's overtalking as Hulsey says "We believe in the First Amendment, freedom of speech" and Meade is asking her if she's in Hulsey's district and the woman says "I'm in Madison, but not his district. I have friends in his district."

Now, we are in Hulsey's district, and Hulsey knows it, because Meade has talked to him on several occasions. Meade goes after Hulsey, who is turning again to walk away, and asks him, "Do you have 5 minutes?"

Hulsey lets out a long "uuuuhhhhhh" then says: "Actually I... t-t-t-to discuss what?" Why should the subject matter affect whether our assemblyman has 5 minutes to talk to Meade? Especially if he's big on free speech, the subject shouldn't matter.

Thereafter Hulsey puts a comical amount of effort into evading Meade, though eventually Meade does get to talk with him.

A year ago today... the big Wisconsin protests began.

The Badger Herald has some reflections, including one by my assemblyman Brett Hulsey ("Gov. Scott Walker dropped a bomb on the people of Wisconsin") and one by UW polisci prof Donald Downs ("The country cries out for genuine vision that goes beyond the entrenched interests and shibboleths of the present right and left.")

Here's my February 13, 2011 post about the "very low key" crowd at the Capitol that day. Typical sign, from before things blew up: "Bullying Is NOT the Answer! Fix if the Plan Needed!" I went on about the lameness of the protest:

You can see that it wasn't a very big crowd. There was an effort to get cars to honk, and when they honked, the honkees went "Wooo!"

There were no speakers and no chants.

No chants! I need to be careful what I agitate for.

There was one man — I have video but I'm not posting it — who seemed a bit disoriented, who did something that is comically easy to do in a low-key protest. He started speaking, haranguing, like he was the leader. The group of nice, tolerant people did nothing to shoo him away. It was rather touching, even as it underlined the ineffectiveness of the protest.

It was a beautiful, unseasonably warm Sunday, and our new governor has just dropped a shocking union-busting proposal that our newly Republican legislature is likely to step up and pass. This is the push-back from the unions?

Ha ha. Is this all you got? I asked.

It was the next day, the 14th, that things started getting big. All I had that day was a link to Isthmus columnist Bill Lueders who said protests would be "a colossal waste of everybody's time, and exactly the reaction Gov. Walker hopes to inspire." The protests would boost Walker?

Either they are peaceful and accomplish nothing; or they turn violent and create a massive backlash against the unions and their members. Either way, Walker wins.

My reaction was: "Wow. When did Madison lefties become so cynical about protests?"

That's all very funny in retrospect. And I was definitely wrong. Madison lefties were immensely, passionately optimistic about protests. And Lueders was right, wasn't he? The protests, in the end — we're not quite at the end yet — will have boosted Walker.

If you'd called something "unadultered complete nonsense"...

... would you highlight that phrase in a self-promoting ad?

You would if you were Wisconsin legislator Brett Hulsey, who's made himself the central character in his new ad against Governor Scott Walker. And the non-word "unadultered" is not the most embarrassing thing about the ad:

The ad continues with Hulsey saying, "I stood up to Gov. Walker. I went to his press conference and said, 'What you have just heard is unadultered [sic] complete nonsense.'"

... The governor did hold a news conference that day, but Hulsey never directly confronted him. What actually happened was that Hulsey waited until the governor had left the room, took over the podium and directed his comments to reporters.

ADDED: I Googled "unadultered" and the first hit took me to some unbelievably evil song lyrics apparently written by a band significant enough to have a Wikipedia page. I have no idea whether Hulsey is into this "Illinois-based hardcore punk, grindcore, and death metal band," but sometimes song lyrics give someone the idea that a non-word is a word. It can be embarrassing. For example, maybe you thought it made sense to call something "swonderful."

IN THE COMMENTS: David said:

Althouse speaks the pompatus of truth.

ADDED: Instapundit links with "WHEN ILLITERATE YAHOO STATE LEGISLATORS attack."

"Who cares about duplicate signatures in Wisconsin Recall?"

"Anti-recall forces will have to establish their own database and run checks for duplicates, in other words, do the government’s work for it."

AND: "Is Hulsey running for governor?" (Remember Hulsey? Hint: He used to run from...)

At the Wisconsin Capitol today, a rag-tag band plays and the assemblyman who's been avoiding Meade suddenly shows up.

Brett Hulsey was avoiding Meade yesterday, but he sought us out today, when we dropped by to see what was going on down at the Capitol. The encounter begins about 2 minutes in, and you see uncut footage of the whole conversation:



The band, which looks like this...



... plays "Solidarity Forever" and then "On, Wisconsin!" Meade sings along with "On, Wisconsin!" and, as he explained to me later, he's deliberately singing tunelessly as a critique of the band.

"'Tear Down This WALL'ker"/"Torture Fitzgerald"/Meade + Hulsey/Krampus.

At the Wisconsin Capitol today... a man in a Reagan mask had come up with a clever saying...



A woman with pinwheels didn't seem to be taking the subject of torture seriously enough...



Our assemblymanm Brett Hulsey — who'd been trying so hard to avoid Meade — found us and was amiable and talkative....



So... let the wild Krampus begin!

At the Planned Parenthood rally, Meade's conversation with Brett Hulsey is aborted.

This morning, Meade went down to the Capitol to meet with our state senator, Fred Risser, who's been a Wisconsin senator since 1962. (He's the longest serving state legislator in the United States.) It's been much harder to get to see our assemblyman, Brett Hulsey. You remember what happened yesterday. Today, after seeing Risser, Meade happened to run into Hulsey.

There was this Planned Parenthood rally. It looked like this:



That's Hulsey standing in front just behind the woman in the white jacket. (Enlargement here.) That's Risser in the red hat just below the speaker's upraised fist. Hulsey noticed Meade. Meade waved at him and he looked away. A bit later,  Hulsey was talking to some women who had come to the rally. And Meade was video-recording. Actually, this was a set-up photo-op, and Meade positioned himself so he had the ideal vantage point. Then, when Hulsey starts walking back toward the Capitol, Meade calls out in the hope of finally getting a few words....



Suffice it to say: The conversation is aborted.

This is what democracy looks like — in Madison, Wisconsin — as Meade seeks access to our assemblyman, Brett Hulsey.

You remember Brett Hulsey. He's the member of the Wisconsin Assembly who represents our district, the 77th, and Meade has been trying to talk with him. Hulsey has been running away, as you saw in this video, recorded on Monday. There, you see that Meade was forced to make an appointment, even though Hulsey darted right out to intervene in support of a protester whom Meade had started to talk to, a woman who had been occupying the center of the rotunda, sitting with a big array of posters on the floor. In that video, we learned that Hulsey allows that protester to store her posters in his office. Hulsey's office later canceled the appointment.

Not having heard back from Hulsey's office about the promised rescheduling, Meade dropped in today to see what was going on. I edited his video to make it very short...



First, Meade encounters the papers-on-the-floor lady. She's no longer plunked down in the center of the rotunda, but relocated off to the side. Why? "There's a blogger...." She denies that anybody ever slipped on her posters, but the blogger — me — stated that somebody slipped on papers in the rotunda — not specifically her papers. And here's the video (at 0:37). It's a big old legislator man who took a fall... and Brett Hulsey was right there when it happened.

Next, Meade goes with the woman as she walks into Hulsey's office to store her things. She doesn't speak to the office assistant or ask permission. She just makes the place her own. Unlike Meade, she is not one of Hulsey's constituents. He's simply facilitating the protests, even as he avoids Meade, who would like to talk to him about things like that.

In the office, Meade briefly encounters Hulsey, who admits he has "a beef" with Meade. Meade is told again to schedule an appointment with the office assistant, but she won't do it.

Basically, our assemblyman has cut off access. The reason that's interesting is that the protesters — to whom he gives super-access — have made a big deal about how the Republicans aren't listening to them and how democracy requires legislators to listen to everyone, even those who are their vehement opponents, even when they are not from their district. But Hulsey is resisting a man who has sought politely to speak with him, who is in his district, and who even voted for him.

***

Why did Meade vote for him? He had a strong challenger to his left. We live in Madison.

AND: Here's the email Meade sent to Hulsey tonight. (I had no role in drafting this letter. It's 100% Meade.)

Dear Brett,

As you know, I have tried to have a constituent/representative meeting with you for some time. I have emailed you, you have not replied; I've phoned, you have not returned my calls; I've come in in person to your office, I've been polite and friendly, left messages with Terri, and you have not responded. When I've run into you - in the rotunda (twice), on State St., outside on the Capitol grounds - you have brushed me off time and again. Meanwhile, I have witnessed numerous occasions when you have had time, time, and more time - for protesters, lobbyists, and union members. That is my beef with you - that, as my representative, you don't seem to want to give me more than 30 seconds of your time. Why?

What I want to know is: what is your beef with me? I'm not a Democrat. But neither am I a Republican. I have always, since 1972, been an independent voter. In the last election, Nov. 2010, I voted for you, I voted for Ron Johnson, and I voted for Scott Walker. I still consider all three to be good choices. I know I live in an extreme left district (30% voted for Manski) and I know you were challenged from the left and I will admit that I voted for you primarily because I viewed you as the most reasonable choice. By far the most reasonable.

I like the budget repair bill and you don't. I accept that. You are still my representative and I believe, in our free democratic system, you have an obligation to meet with me and address my concerns. You tried to school me in freedom of speech after encountering me in the rotunda two days ago. Do you remember? What about my freedom of speech? Am I not allowed to express my concerns and opinions to my elected representative, to dissent in a legal, civil manner? I know I have the constitutional right but it seems to me you are trying to block my opportunities to do so.

I have spoken with a number of Democratic senators and assemblymen over the past month. More than one has described the budget repair controversy as "war." So, Brett, I want to ask you straight out: Do you see it as "war?" And if you do - because I am in dissent with your position - do you see me as your enemy?

I am absolutely not your enemy. I am your constituent and I am a citizen.

As you know, I have also become a journalist/blogger because I want to report, as accurately as I can within my own acknowledged biases, the truth of what has recently been happening in Wisconsin government and politics.

So please consider making an effort to have a civil exchange with me. You know that I know that this is a slow time for you, deadlines notwithstanding. I expect to be treated by my elected officials with the due respect and neighborliness of a fellow Wisconsin citizen who treats them likewise.

Very truly yours,

Laurence Meade

A protester sits in the center of the Capitol rotunda floor, day after day, with posters spread all around, facilitated by Democratic Assemblyman Brett Hulsey.

The last few times we've gone to the Wisconsin Capitol, we've encountered a woman who sits on the floor, right in the center of the rotunda. You can see her in this picture from March 15th [and at 1:39 in the video here]. She spreads posters (and a display of buttons) right where visitors are most likely to want to stand to gaze up into the dome. Children love to lie down there for dome-gazing. But this woman has appropriated the spot — not just for sitting, but for a display of anti-Walker signs.

Now, there is a list of rules about what you can't do in the Capitol, and one thing is: post signs. This is perhaps a good law school exam question: Are signs arrayed on a horizontal surface posted? Meade — Flip camera in hand — started to interview the woman about that. No sooner does the questioning begin than WI Assemblyman Brett Hulsey shows up to ask the woman whether Meade "is behaving himself"....



The woman tells Hulsey Meade's question, and Meade amplifies the issue by asking "What's to stop you from getting, you know, 100 times this number of signs and spreading out into the whole rotunda and spreading out into all the hallways?" She says: "I don't think there's anything with that except I have to pick them up at the end of the night."

Hulsey answers: "Personal restraint." Meade says: "Is that it? Personal restraint?" We see that Hulsey has turned his back and is walking away (as Meade is in the middle of thanking him). Then, hilariously, the woman volunteers: "Brett is nice that he told me that when I bring these in, I don't have to take them with me at night. I can go store them in his office overnight."

The camera pans to Hulsey, who has turned back toward Meade. Hulsey has a sheepish frown-grin on his face. Meade says "Truly?!" The woman says "yes, yes" as Hulsey nods his head a few times. Hulsey says: "We believe in free speech."

Meade: "So, you're not only approving, but you're facilitating?"

The woman: "He's not facilitating. I only just asked him if I can, I said, I come here with signs. I just asked him if I could store the signs in his office overnight and he told me I could."

There's overtalking as Hulsey says "We believe in the First Amendment, freedom of speech" and Meade is asking her if she's in Hulsey's district and the woman says "I'm in Madison, but not his district. I have friends in his district."

Now, we are in Hulsey's district, and Hulsey knows it, because Meade has talked to him on several occasions. Meade goes after Hulsey, who is turning again to walk away, and asks him, "Do you have 5 minutes?"

Hulsey lets out a long "uuuuhhhhhh" then says: "Actually I... t-t-t-to discuss what?" Why should the subject matter affect whether our assemblyman has 5 minutes to talk to Meade? Especially if he's big on free speech, the subject shouldn't matter.

Meade: "I wanna ask you questions and, uh, get your thoughts and opinions..."

Hulsey interrupts to say that Meade should make an appointment with "Terry" — "because I'm on deadlines with a couple things." The deadlines didn't stop him from darting right out to protect the rotunda-sitting lady from Meade's questioning, and indeed, when Meade goes into the office to make the appointment, Hulsey's assistant says "This is a slow week."

So... deadlines... slow week... What's the deal?

UPDATE: So, in the video you see Hulsey's assistant scheduling his appointment for 2 days later. Today, Hulsey's office called to reschedule and canceled the existing appointment (without giving him a new one). Evasive? But he's was right there when papers-on-the-floor lady seemed to need help answering Meade's questions. And, he was also right there — in video Meade took — when another legislator fell flat on the floor of the rotunda after slipping on papers protesters had put there!