Hopeful that Sheriff Greening will have opposition in next election

In a recent article in the Antigo paper, it stated that Bill Greening will be running for Sheriff again in the November election. I sincerely hope that Langlade County has not forgotten some of his public statements and hopefully he will have opposition in the election.

There are few things that rubbed me the wrong way with Sheriff Greening, one of them being the murder investigation Cathy Nameth. I can recall seeing the Sheriff on the news more than once stating that the investigation was close to being concluded and that he believed the person responsible would be found and prosecuted. I have yet to see or hear anything about that again in last few YEARS. So, what is happening there? An update would be nice.

Another statement that Greening made is still on this website, when he was on the phone with CNN and talking about how the big drug bust with the ex-principal was just the tip of the iceberg. Hmmm, not much happening with that now either. What's going on there Mr. Greening?

And wasn't he the Sheriff when Officer Jason Just was quietly removed due to his illegal actions with minor females?

Sorry Mr. Greening, but, I think you have proved to me that you are not who I want to see as Sheriff and at this point I will vote for anyone who runs against you!

source article - http://antigodailyjournal.com/index.php?ID=18296


Really. Bathsalts huh? Wait until Greening challenges Stegall to a debate and there will be one. There has always been a debate between Sheriff's candidates. We will see how he does then and what does Ralph have to do with any of this. He's not running for Sheriff.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion even though all you did was name call without giving any examples to back up your now baseless claims. I think the people of Langlade County did great. As far as I heard Sam ran a clean campaign and hats off to him for doing so and congratulations to Mr. Stegall on his win. To the poster of the comment I've responded to. There used to be something people had even if their candidate lost. Class. You could use a lesson in it.

Can it really get any worse. We just need a change.From what I have seen both of them ran clean.

I agree both (Sam and Joe) ran clean campaigns. Sorry the way I wrote my previous comment it could be construed that I only implied 1 person had. Hats off to the both of them for running a clean campaign.

Hats off to both of them, Tells you that both of them are stand up guys.

Oh it will get worse. Wurtinger showed class. The only thing he said was according to the paper was he thanked his supporters and he was disappointed in the low voter turn-out. People I talked to said he never bad mouthed Stegall or Greening. Stegall won't be so lucky with Greening. Anything he can find to use against him he will. Look what he did to Steger. Joe had better hope he has a clean background and no skeletons. I have a feeling if he doesn't, it won't be long and we will know about.

In regards to Greening from what I hear it would serve his best interest to keep it clean. I hear he has bones rattling in his own closet.

I guess you have all the answers! Why don't you run? Sounds like you could do better than all of them.

I would have run if I knew anything about how to be a Sheriff. Probably should have now. Apparently you don't need to know sh*t when it comes to being Sheriff. What the hell, Write me in. I know how to cut logs. I am a nice guy. There is a disconnect between the Sheriff Dept and the public. All we need is less politics and more service. Write me in.

Stegall didn't do anything to Steger. Never said he did. Greening on the other hand used every little thing he could against Steger. The "facts" you have on Greening won't do you much good unless you come forward. What concerns me, by your own statement, you have "facts" crime/crimes have been committed and have not reported them. It obvious you haven't because Greening is still in office. In my book that makes you no better than the person that committed them. This should get interesting.

Greening does that and people want him to uphold the law. Tells you something about who he is.

Oh yeah this should get real interesting. Because only 2 things can come of that type of statement. Either A. The poster has the dirt on Greening and now will have to air it. Or B. They don't have dirt on Greening and will find out what the definition of libel is. Will be interesting to see where this goes. I would have to believe nobody would be foolish enough to post something such as that if they really didn't have the facts.

You people are such a hoot. Y'all know everything about everyone. So if Greening has falsified papers, why are you airing this crap here? Apparently this is the legal route to prosecute someone. Go for it Ralph Jr. I get the feeling Stegall is a pretty clueless dude. Should be fun seeing what shakes outta his past. So far he has been a pretty good poser stealin Wurtinger sign design and now ideas.

Not sure why you replied to my comment. I didn't say he falsified anything. Also are you obsessed with the Stegall guy? Myself and the other poster were discussing Greening and somehow you turned your reply to our discussion on Greening into bashing the other guy running. lol We get it your panties are in a bunch and your mad this Stegall is running. Then make up your own thread and talk about it we are talking about Greening. Thanks!

I wasn't replying to you and no clue why it got posted that way. And excuuuseeeee meeee for writing on a public thread. I had no clue that only those in agreement with you can post. And while you speculated, although incorrectly, my panties as you put it are just fine. From what I gather the entire discussion has been about more than just Greening.
I don't give a rats rear about Stegall running. But it does seem I struck a nerve with someone else as I seem to have no life. Maybe I can borrow theirs for awhile as they don't seem to be using it.

Yeah on the one part about ya commenting on a public thread you are correct I was having a bad day and really at the end of the day it doesn't matter we are all able to say whatever we want to say. Take care and sorry on that part.

Are you still crying about signs? What in the world is your obsession with lawn signs? Get on with your life. If worrying about Joe Stegall's lawn sign design is your biggest problem you got it good. There's a life out there...Go find one!!

So where is all the dirt on Greening?

Below is a portion of Mr. Stegall's Interview with the Antigo Paper. Attached is a link to the directory of White Lake High School Graduates. Pay attention to the year 1982. I guess we can scratch "honest" off from the list.

Joseph Stegall of Bryant has resided in Langlade County for his entire life and is looking to lead an agency at which he is currently employed. Raised at White Lake where he graduated with the class of 1982, the married father of five and grandfather to four has been a corrections officer in the Langlade County Jail


I really don't think that Mr. Stegall would allow that piece of information to be printed if it weren't true.

As for the website that you are referring to, I know for a fact that it isn't always accurate. I have a family member that graduated and it not on that list.

Oh it's true. The list for that year is accurate. It was already verified.

So the truth is finally coming out..... My goodness how does dishonest taste Mr. Stegall?

Check your facts before you accuse. My goodness, how does stupidity taste?

I did all the verification before posting, so I knew Mr. Stegall did not graduate from White Lake High School with the class of 1982 like he told the paper... and I'm thinking you can tell me exactly how stupid tastes as I do believe you swallowed a spoon full.

Did you talk to the interviewer at the newspaper? Were you at the interview?

How exactly did you verify that Joe lied?
Perhaps you need to look up the definition of the word verification.

The real liar is Mr. Greening -time and time again!

So in all your grand wisdom you really think he is going to lie about what year he graduated? lol! Must be really grasping at straws if that is the only thing you can come up with. As for your comment "I guess we can scratch "honest" off the list." Well in regards to yourself and your investigative journalism I guess we can scratch "intelligent" of the list ya clown! We'll have to take donations and buy you a new big red rubber nose before you head out on your next mission. ;) I'll even thrown in a pair of big funny shoes! Also hope you are resting at home and not on a government payroll posting at 9:30 am on our dime.

I for one don't think he is going to lie, he did lie. Maybe you are on to something. We should have the media do a fact finding inquiry on what they printed in regards to the interview and see what they come up with. Good luck with your rubber nose and funny shoes, I hope they fit you!

You, right here in the above post, are contradicting yourself - read what you wrote.
First you claim as a fact that "he did lie", but, go on to say that some fact finding needs to be done! YOUR STATING AN OPINION AS FACT!
Unless you are the person who interviewed Joe for that newspaper article, how can you say what was implied, assumed or blatantly stated? YOU CAN'T - PERIOD!

So you should not be stating your opinion as fact!
Your credibility is zero after this ridiculousness!

This is true and can be easily verified. All you have to do is call the school and ask if the list is correct. Tell will tell you it is.


Oh but that is not graduating from high school as he stated in his article to the paper. I do believe he dropped out of high school and later, earned a GED. Those two are not the same.

He received a diploma from White Lake High School, so I am sure that is why it was stated the way it was.

That is probably why the newspaper did not state that he was a 1982 graduate, instead, it said he graduated WITH the class of 1982.

Besides, this is piddly and stupid ! If this is all you have, good luck with it! And here I thought MAYBE for ONCE, there could be a decent debate and information on here without all the BS, I guess I should have known better.

Oh, my. Seriously? This is ridiculous. I'm laughing my -ss off at the stupidity here. If this is an example of what Sam's supporters are like, then Langlade County should be thankful Joe won the primary, because you know the saying: Birds of a feather. Ridiculous! Joe did graduate. Wow, seriously that was just stupid to claim he didn't.

Funny you think I support Sam... Guess you are a brick short of a load.

Ok, so you support Greening. Well, just read my comment again, and just switch out "Sam" for "Greening". Your vulgar reply just continues to show the character of those who don't support Joe Stegall.

So he didn't graduate high school in 1982. Finishing High School at the "TECH" is called a General Education Diploma. (G.E.D) It really don't appear someone is grasping at straws in this matter. It appears a concern has been aired as far as Mr. Stegall being truthful about his background. Not good for someone who is seeking the office of sheriff. If he finished high school under the G.E.D. program, then he should have stated that in his interview. He probably never wanted to say he had a G.E.D because if he did people would have know he dropped out of High School.

He received a diploma from White Lake high school.

I have no idea why everyone is so interested in "taking down" Mr. Stegall. Being so attached and clinging to the high school thing is ridiculous. That was 32 years ago and if you people are seriously going to sit there and say he is a dishonest man or not as smart for supposedly not graduating with his class then thank God you are not the ones running for sheriff. Just because the person you voted for did not make it through the primary does not give you the right to slander somebodies name and make him seem like some horrible person. You obviously have no idea who you are talking about and do not know him personally. Education DOES NOT make you the person that you are and having a higher education than another person DOES NOT make you a better person so take you're nose out of the air, get off you're high horse and get a clue. The copying sign this is just hilarious that someone would even make such a silly childish thing up. So glad Stegall won!

So it is okay to say anything you want on here about Greening or Wurtinger, but point out something about Stegall your either a clown or a joke. People aren't clinging to the "h.s. thing". They are pointing out Stegall lied about graduating h.s. IN 1982!

Once again, not a single bit a proof has been shown that Stegall purposely lied about graduating. Someone made an assumption and is offering an opinion as to what actually was said at the interview with the newspaper.

Stop making assumptions. Were you at that interview? Did you witness the interview? If not, don't make it seem as though this is a fact, when it's not!

Seriously Appalled, I agree 100%! It's all so childish. Start acting like adults. These ridiculous comments are so immature and show the true colors of the supporters of Sam and Greening. Just like what was mentioned - birds of a feather. I don't see any Joe Stegall supporters anywhere acting this childish. Birds of a feather.

There really is no comparison at all when it comes to "dirt" between Greening and Stegall. Greening has a bad history as mentioned originally in this post. Stegall, on the other hand, does not. It is obvious that some Greening-backers are trying real hard to drudge up stuff on Stegall and so far, it is a joke.

Could Joe Stegall or someone from his campaign tell me why they feel the need to keep bashing Mr. Wurtinger? As far as I can tell he lost the election, graciously thanked those who supported him by placing an ad in the Journal and has gone on with his life. Neither Republican candidate in the primary was slinging mud against the other, what purpose would it serve to start now?
What has he done to Mr. Stegall's group to warrant such vicious attacks?
But yet, this appears to be the same respondents who are crying foul when anything is said against Mr. Stegall. Isn't what's good for the goose also good for the gander? It doesn't shine a positive light on his campaign.
As far as I can tell, the race has now been narrowed down to the incumbent, Bill Greening and his challenger Joe Stegall. It may be time for Mr. Stegall's supporters to take a good long look at themselves and the poor behavior they are displaying.
Right now, although not my preferred choice, I may have to choose the incumbent as I am repulsed by who Mr. Stegall has surrounded himself by, thus making me wonder if he is just like them with and do not find him to be a candidate I could vote for.

Personally I think the vicious attacks have been towards all not just 1

I am not Mr. Stegall or affiliated with his campaign. However thinking any candidate can control who supports them or how they choose to speak out against another is foolish at best. I was told of posts by a current dispatcher that they pulled down after the primary stating how "disgusted they were with the people of Langlade County for that outcome" So is it Sams fault that she was posting like a child mad at not getting her way? By your logic yes. I on the other hand would say no. Maybe you should rethink how you hold people to a higher standard than those you support? I would doubt Mr. Stegall would support anyone bashing anyone. Much like I would be sure Sam didn't support the childish outrage displayed by the dispatcher. To be honest your wording of being repulsed sounds almost the same tone the lady was using. (edited) Also I think at least that I have read every post on this board. What "vicious" attacks do you speak of? So you expect people to believe you vote Republican. Yet per your words "although he is not my preferred choice I may vote for the incumbent". Vote for who you'd like to it's America. Even if it's against your own party and conscience. That says more about you than any of the candidates or their supporters. I'll even wish you to have a great week so that you don't surmise that by simply not agreeing with you that it could be interpreted as a vicious attack.

You have a wonderful way of passively/aggressively putting me down.
First, I do not know who works in dispatch so as you hide behind your submission, you feel brave enough to call someone else out. How about you be brave enough to leave your initials as well? It also seems you have a dislike for this individual and feel this was your way of bashing them. Was that really necessary?
Since I do not know of the post you referred to, did this person say specifically they supported Mr. Wurtinger? Or are you just assuming that is who they were backing? Were these post on here? If so, how were they able to "pull them down?" If the posts were not on here, than please keep your references to just this blog.
In order to answer your question, (edited) My initials happen to be S.J.and I am a female.
Second, I apparently was not clear enough on what I was referring to. The rash of conversation was since the high school graduation debate. And I use that term very loosely. Bashing would be much more accurate.
There seemed to be a bunch of bashing toward the accusation that Mr. Stegall lied when supplying information to the newspaper for the article on him. And toward whom everyone assumed brought this to light.
And since you have been reading right along, you will note that on 8/22 at 7:47 pm another person referred to the posts as vicious attacks. A post on 8/21 at 9:44 am also referred to a respondent at vulgar.
I don't view calling someone a "clown or a joke" as polite disagreement. That is an attack on a person. Just like "how does dishonest taste" or "how does stupid taste."
I welcomed Mr. Stegall or his entourage in getting on here and explaining why this bashing was going on toward Mr. Wurtinger. What "thing" had he done to them to warrant attacks on him? I was looking for clarity.
My attempt was to get people to take a look at what they were writing and maybe think twice before tearing another person down. I gave an observation of what I saw happening during the primary, why beat down the person who lost and has gone on with his life?
This would be the perfect time and place for Mr. Stegall to let those who support him know that this is not how he wants to be perceived.
Third, I never said I was Republican or Democrat, but between the two candidates, Mr. Stegall was not coming off in a good light. I do not consider myself to be tied to a particular party, but more so I DO vote my conscience. I hold the right to vote in very high regard and do not take that privilege lightly.
Fourth, I take it you are not familiar with Mr. Stegall, since you refer to him in a formal manner and said you are not affiliated with him. But yet why do you feel comfortable enough to talk for him? You must be a friend of Mr. Wurtinger as you refer to him on a personal level, something you would do with a friend. So you are also able to speak for him? Could you please explain how you feel so comfortable talking for both?
Personally I do not know either and wouldn't feel I could speak for them either. I'm just tired of the trash talking. Is no one able to voice their opinion or thoughts without feeling the need to tear down an individual who doesn't agree with you?
Anonymous, you can have a different opinion than I, and gladly do so without attacking me as a person. Or feel the need to patronize.

I have a lot of respect for anyone who avoided cliques and such in high school, sounds like Joe was one of those. He has my vote!

Can Joe walk on water too?

So I disagree with the comment above about the dispatcher acting like the "mad child" not getting their way and displaying such "childish outrage." If you are not Mr. Stegall or affiliated with his campaign then why do you take such offense to someone posting their political view on their OWN Facebook page? Since when is someone considered childish because they have opinion about the outcome of a vote? If they would have rejoiced at Mr. Stegall's victory then that would have been OK? At least he/she wasn't afraid to post it on their Facebook page and not under some "anonymous" name on Antigo Buzz. Seems to me like you take real offense to the fact that someone didn't support Mr. Stegall. In reading these posts, I've noticed that it's OK for some to have a negative opinion about Mr. Greening or Mr. Wurtinger but as soon as there is something negative about Stegall, the name calling starts. If there is any childish outrage at all, it's on the posts from the Stegall supporters. Posting your opinions under your own name is far from childish.


Add new comment

Please refrain from adding URLs to unrelated or commercial websites. This site is moderated and comments with inappropriate links are rejected. Thank you for your understanding.

No profane language is allowed! Posts that contain profanity will not be published.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Enter the characters shown in the image.