Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Cowardly Behavior
In response to a few bloggers who thought Fred Dooley's recent deletion of an egregiously inaccurate post was unethical, Fred wrote this at his site, Real Debate Wisconsin.
I stand by a comment I made. If Fred had simply admitted his error on the original post; if he had admitted he jumped before looking when he accused the Obama/Biden campaign of lying about election rules, no one would probably have cared.
Instead, Fred's reaction makes him appear even sillier and cowardly in the eyes of his peers.
Late Sunday evening I posted a piece highlighting an Obama flyer telling people how to vote.I wrote a reply in the comment section there addressing this latest failure of Fred's to understand what it was he had done wrong.
Among the items listed there was a line telling if you could not prove who you are to bring along a neighbor to vouch for you.
I thought that illegal and researched and posted as much.
The next morning it was brought to my attention that idiotic standard was indeed legal so I did the right thing and deleted the post immediately. Funny thing though, whenever I do the right thing the left always complains about the way I do it. That's what the left does, complains about the right.
The left in their unyielding idiocy has been screaming for a retraction. Sometimes I don't have time to write a flowery piece and only have time to press the delete button, this was one of those times. Until someone starts paying me to blog, that will be the way things are around here.
Fact is in Wisconsin there are no standards to be able to vote.
I apologize for that post in error on Sunday evening.
However, I'm still waiting for all the lefties in the area to put up posts regarding the clearing of Sarah Palin in Trooper-Gate. One sided outrage is such an ugly thing.
However, I'm still waiting for all the lefties in the area to put up posts regarding the clearing of Sarah Palin in Trooper-Gate.Fred has now informed me via e-mail that this post has been deleted and I have lost posting privileges. Considering I post a comment there approximately once every three months, I'm fairly certain I'll be able to overcome my disappointment. But it is truly a sad commentary on this person.
Why? That was a legitimate news story. And, she was cleared using appropriate channels. Government officials should always be held to a higher standard. Besides, I personally wrote nothing about Troopergate. I see no reason to write anything now.
Your faux pas, on the other hand, was done out of willful ignorance. You thought you saw a gotcha moment and jumped without looking.
Additionally, by deleting your post rather that leaving it and including your mea culpa as a responsible blogger would have done, you have now left Red State hanging because their original link to your post now leads no where. Questions, questions.
I stand by a comment I made. If Fred had simply admitted his error on the original post; if he had admitted he jumped before looking when he accused the Obama/Biden campaign of lying about election rules, no one would probably have cared.
Instead, Fred's reaction makes him appear even sillier and cowardly in the eyes of his peers.
George McGovern
Back in 1972, when I was a sophomore in highschool, I first became acquainted with presidential campaigns and candidates by helping to run the student-led campaign for the anti-war Republican congressman, Pete McCloskey. McCloskey's run for the Republican nomination was doomed to failure. He was facing the still incredibly popular President Richard Nixon who had managed to push Watergate questions temporarily into the background.
But it was fun and it piqued an interest in politics I didn't know I had. Soon, with McCloskey in the background I became aware of the Democratic candidate for president, George McGovern. McGovern's campaign was making a huge effort to get the youth vote out and I was swept along in the enthusiasm generated by his quixotic campaign. Unfortunately, the Tom Eagleton affair blew up his bid and that enthusiasm faded and failed to turn out the vote.
Four years later it was Gerald Ford vs. Jimmy Carter for president. I was now old enough to vote, but neither choice did much for me. So, my first vote for the presidency wound up being a write-in as I voted for George McGovern.
Fourteen years later (I spent the intervening years travelling the US, Europe and working) ... I'm working part-time at the Kenwood Inn at the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee. I had just gotten to work and I peeked out into the dining room. I was stunned to see George McGovern enter, escorted by a couple of professors I recognized.
Anyway, I was excited. George McGovern! I had always wanted to meet him and here was my chance. I walked over, excused myself and asked the Senator if I could shake his hand. He smiled and as we shook hands I told him that I was honored to finally meet him and that, additionally, I had voted for him in 1976.
The professors sitting at the table exchanged smirky looks. McGovern, though, was all courtesy and he gently told me that I must have meant 1972 because that was the year he ran for president. I smiled and said no. I explained I hadn't been old enough to vote in 1972 so had waited until the next election to write his name in.
With that he smiled again, thanked me and squeezed my hand a bit extra. I'll never forget our meeting.
It's a shame that McGovern never got the chance to lead our nation. We as a people would have been better off -- by far.
But it was fun and it piqued an interest in politics I didn't know I had. Soon, with McCloskey in the background I became aware of the Democratic candidate for president, George McGovern. McGovern's campaign was making a huge effort to get the youth vote out and I was swept along in the enthusiasm generated by his quixotic campaign. Unfortunately, the Tom Eagleton affair blew up his bid and that enthusiasm faded and failed to turn out the vote.
Four years later it was Gerald Ford vs. Jimmy Carter for president. I was now old enough to vote, but neither choice did much for me. So, my first vote for the presidency wound up being a write-in as I voted for George McGovern.
Fourteen years later (I spent the intervening years travelling the US, Europe and working) ... I'm working part-time at the Kenwood Inn at the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee. I had just gotten to work and I peeked out into the dining room. I was stunned to see George McGovern enter, escorted by a couple of professors I recognized.
Anyway, I was excited. George McGovern! I had always wanted to meet him and here was my chance. I walked over, excused myself and asked the Senator if I could shake his hand. He smiled and as we shook hands I told him that I was honored to finally meet him and that, additionally, I had voted for him in 1976.
The professors sitting at the table exchanged smirky looks. McGovern, though, was all courtesy and he gently told me that I must have meant 1972 because that was the year he ran for president. I smiled and said no. I explained I hadn't been old enough to vote in 1972 so had waited until the next election to write his name in.
With that he smiled again, thanked me and squeezed my hand a bit extra. I'll never forget our meeting.
It's a shame that McGovern never got the chance to lead our nation. We as a people would have been better off -- by far.
I Voted, Too
Well, just got back from voting. It's none of your business who I voted for (like it's a mystery), but I can say my 22-month old daughter voted for Barack Obama and she has the "I Voted" sticker to prove it.
I'm waiting for the cries of voter fraud.
I'm waiting for the cries of voter fraud.
Pete McCloskey
This has been a most exciting pre-election season. I really can't remember a better one, though personally, I favor the 1972 campaign. Here's why.
That year I was a sophomore in highschool at West Bend West (Go Spartans!). As part of one of those civic duty lessons that social studies departments are so fond of, we students were given the opportunity to organize our own campaigns for president, with the actual players in the primaries as our clients.
Being a bit of a rebel I decided to head the Pete McCloskey for President campaign. Heaven forbid I would do anything for Richard Nixon -- mostly because my dad was voting for him, but also because I had yet to make that clean break from my dad and move to the Democratic side of the ledger. Eventually I would and George McGovern is today still a hero of mine (another story on that).
I don't remember much about McCloskey except that he was against the Vietnam War, and didn't stand a chance of winning. But he wasn't Nixon.
(As an aside, looking him up in Wiki, I now recall that he was a co-author of the Endangered Species Act.)
We had to give a speech before the student body (I was nominated to do this). I must have been quite the sight -- 120 pounds soaking wet with mismatched clothes (I still have this issue today, my wife dresses me for important occasions) and one-armed glasses resting perilously on my geeky nose.
There were three of us in the McCloskey campaign. He wound up garnering 13 votes. Though he lost by a huge margin (Washington County being Nixon country then and very conservative today), I considered it a victory of sorts that we'd been able to convince ten others.
Oh, and we had balloons and gave out candy bars. No other campaign used props.
That year I was a sophomore in highschool at West Bend West (Go Spartans!). As part of one of those civic duty lessons that social studies departments are so fond of, we students were given the opportunity to organize our own campaigns for president, with the actual players in the primaries as our clients.
Being a bit of a rebel I decided to head the Pete McCloskey for President campaign. Heaven forbid I would do anything for Richard Nixon -- mostly because my dad was voting for him, but also because I had yet to make that clean break from my dad and move to the Democratic side of the ledger. Eventually I would and George McGovern is today still a hero of mine (another story on that).
I don't remember much about McCloskey except that he was against the Vietnam War, and didn't stand a chance of winning. But he wasn't Nixon.
(As an aside, looking him up in Wiki, I now recall that he was a co-author of the Endangered Species Act.)
We had to give a speech before the student body (I was nominated to do this). I must have been quite the sight -- 120 pounds soaking wet with mismatched clothes (I still have this issue today, my wife dresses me for important occasions) and one-armed glasses resting perilously on my geeky nose.
There were three of us in the McCloskey campaign. He wound up garnering 13 votes. Though he lost by a huge margin (Washington County being Nixon country then and very conservative today), I considered it a victory of sorts that we'd been able to convince ten others.
Oh, and we had balloons and gave out candy bars. No other campaign used props.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Who's Unethical
Fred Dooley, owner and operator of the amusement blog, Real Debate Wisconsin, has a problem with unethical behavior. And well he should. Unethical behavior is something that should be stamped out. Especially when it's a blogger doing it because the actions of one do affect the actions of the others.More on this later in this post -- read on.
Red State, a nationally-known conservative blog reported this little tidbit this morning at 8:36 am.
The Democrats are passing out a flyer in Wisconsin that tells people just how easy to vote in Wisconsin.The problem with this is, as pointed out by one of Red State's commenters, it's inaccurate. Just to provide proof (you know, for the sake of truthiness) of what the flyer from the Obama/Biden campaign said, below is a scan.
One of the bullet points is this:No proof of residence? You can still register to vote if you bring an eligible voter from your municipality who shows proof of residence and affirms that you live at your address.There is just one problem. That's not the law in Wisconsin. Having a character witness cannot get you registered to vote.
But who cares. Law, scmaw as far the Democrats are concerned.
Now, let's go to page 27 of the Election Day Manual for Wisconsin Election Officials. It states:
Corroborating WitnessThere's more, but the gist of the flyer is absolutely accurate. Turns out those Democrats are actually quite ethical.
If an Election Day registrant or a voter with an “ID required” notation is unable to provide proof of residence, they may have another qualified elector of the municipality corroborate his or her residence by signing the Voter Registration Application (EB-131) as a witness. The corroborator must be a qualified elector of the municipality and provide proof of residence. The corroborator is not required to be a registered voter.
Hmmm. Kind of makes you wonder where Red State got this wrong information? Why, the link to the source is right there in the body of the text. The link encompasses the words “...are passing out a flyer in Wisconsin.” And where does the link lead to -- nowhere anymore because the offensive post has been deleted. But before that deletion occurred, the link quite clearly jumped to here:
http://realdebatewisconsin.blogspot.com/2008/11/Obama-camp-encouraging-vote-fraud-in.html
Say it ain't so Joe the Plumber. Fred Dooley at Real Debate Wisconsin is playing fast and easy with ethics? Yep. Fortunately, due to the timely actions of a local person, we have the text of the original Dooley post.
The attached document is encouraging activity in violation of Wisconsin's already loose election law.All gone.
I quote, "No proof of residence? You can still register to vote if you bring an eligible voter from your municipality who shows proof of residence and affirms that you live at your address."
Sorry folks, they made that up. Here is a link to the State of Wisconsin Elections Board rules, nowhere does showing up to register with someone to vouch for you come into play.
This flyer was paid or by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin so they are obviously complicit in encouraging people to break election law.
Why do Democrats keep trying to cheat?
Why won't any of the major media call them on it?
Can you imagine the outroar if Republicans were passing fraudulent information about Wisconsin election law? Hell, they are after AG Van Hollen for daring to ask the "accountability" board to follow the freaking law.
The unethical Democratic party is at it again, and they'll continue to get away with it until enough people raise hell about this problem.
Nowhere to be found.
Vanished into thin air.
Pffft.
Of course, it's not the first time either. Next time Fred has anything to say about anything, don't you believe him. I'll bet Red State will think twice.
I think Fred deserves a big old F-bomb for this prank. Thanks Fred, for making us all look bad.
Update: Zach has a nice take on this, though he
It's a Matter of Context
Charlie Sykes lies so often about everything that it's got to be difficult for him to keep track. Just this morning (I turned WTMJ on to listen to Wayne Laravie's recap of the game -- not on) Charlie said he would be covering two things in depth that Barack Obama said the previous day. "... and I'm not taking these out of context," he breathlessly exclaimed.
Charlie admits that he does take things out of context. Really. Lying Charlie Sykes admits he's a liar.
It's going to be a good day.
Charlie admits that he does take things out of context. Really. Lying Charlie Sykes admits he's a liar.
It's going to be a good day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
