Friday, January 18, 2008

The Hate Right

McIlheran repeats the same drivel that Sykes had on earlier, and ends his post with this:

All I know is that, consequent to some of the opinions I post, I get comments and email saying I should be forthwith fired to save the remaining dignity of the Journal Sentinel. I am also told, often in the same comments or email, that I am writing hate-filled opinions or that I am evidently motivated by hate. To which all I can say is that I don't feel particularly enraged and that I haven't ever written a letter to the editor demanding someone be canned because I disagreed with him.

Oh, no! Someone criticized him. How Dreadful! What a blow to his fragile ego.

But did he ever receive the type of comments that Illusory Tenant did? I highly doubt it.

We might be the "hate left" in their eyes, but at least we have manners.


  1. Forget the dignity of the paper. He ought to be fired because he writes like a journalism faculty member at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

  2. Capper...who is this Peter? How does he fit into the scheme of the conservative blogesphere? Is he local? I'm just wondering...because some of his comments certainly would borderline what I would consider to be threatening.

  3. Fair Play: He has a blog titled: Texas Hold'em Blogger. Just type that into Google to go there.

    The sad thing is he actually is a talented writer ... with huge anger issues.

  4. It is of little surprise that Mitt Romney is staying out of the debate over "September Dawn."

    After all, isn't there a campaign adage of not getting involved in any controversy unless you absolutely have to?

  5. Waukesha - A psychiatrist already serving four years of probation for possession of child pornography was ordered to stand trial Friday on a sexual assault charge after a 14-year-old boy tearfully testified that the doctor molested him during a counseling session in 2006.

    At a preliminary hearing to determine whether the case against Eric B. Schwietering of Milwaukee should proceed to trial, the boy testified that Schwietering questioned him during a counseling session about his sexual habits and asked him to disrobe July 10, 2006.

    When he declined, the boy said, Schwietering forced him down on a couch, partially disrobed him and touched him indecently.

    Schwietering, 41, was charged in October with sexual assault of a child younger than 16, a felony.

    According to testimony Friday and a criminal complaint, the assault occurred when Schwietering was associated with Cornerstone Counseling, 16535 W. Blue Mound Road, Brookfield. Schwietering no longer practices at the center.

    After the assault, the boy testified, Schwietering told him not to tell anyone about what had occurred and said he would hurt him if he did.

    The complaint says the matter came to light in the fall when the boy, now living at a residential school in Keokuk, Iowa, told his mother in e-mail that he had been assaulted by Schwietering, who specialized in treating children and adolescents.

    Schwietering's attorney, Paul Bucher, sought to have the case dismissed, telling Waukesha County Circuit Court Commissioner Martin Binn that the boy's testimony and statements to authorities were not credible.

    But Binn rejected the argument and ordered Schwietering to return to court Feb. 6.

    In May, Schwietering was placed on four years of probation in Milwaukee County Circuit Court on two felony counts of possession of child pornography.

  6. Common sense on a complex issue from the new Milwaukee police chief is very welcome. Local law enforcement should have a limited role in this arena.
    From the Journal Sentinel
    Posted: Jan. 18, 2008
    "This (immigration) is a demagogue issue. . . . There is a sense out there that there is some simple solution. I think all of you know the following rule of thumb: For every complicated problem, there is a simple solution that's wrong."

    Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn

    Only weeks on the job and he's already talking sense.

    Flynn, responding to a question in a meeting with the Editorial Board on Wednesday, said he doesn't have plans to alter how the Police Department deals with the immigrant community, a significant part of which he and everyone else knows is undocumented.

    Other local departments can learn from the common sense the chief had to offer on this topic. Police departments elsewhere in the country seemingly want to turn themselves into immigration officers. A bad move. Flynn noted how counterproductive this is.

    "If someone shot you, is our first question, 'What's your immigration status?' or 'Can you describe your assailant?' "

    He said he was satisfied with the department's current policy. Which is: "If you're a felon, we're happy to get rid of you and notify the appropriate authorities."

    In the routine course of business, however, it benefits everyone if any victim or witness to crime feels free to contact and speak freely with local law enforcement, he seemed to be saying. He's right.

    The majority of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in this country are not committing crimes. The chief estimated that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has maybe 33,000 slots for the illegal immigrants they catch. Deportation? Twelve million, 33,000. The math doesn't work.

    And there's this: "Do you really think they're going to come at 2 o'clock in the morning in District 7 to pick up a bricklayer who just got caught without a driver's license and is here illegally?" the chief asked.

    No, neither do we, though there are many in this country who wrongly believe in the enforcement-first-and-only policy.

    "Pretending that there is a role for local law enforcement of significance in this is disingenuous," the chief said.

    Right again.

    What should be the role of police departments in enforcing immigration law? Send a letter to: Journal Sentinel editorial department

  7. What a dainty little priss.

  8. wow, I linked to this post on the Racine Journal Times blogs and it got deleted.........I guess they don't like one of their regular bloggers and now one with some fame of his own on the right wingosphere being exposed as the hate filled, threatening person he is.
    The shame is that many people there read him without having any idea of what kind of stuff he has posted elsewhere so they consider him someone to listen to.

  9. Kay,

    They probably don't like some of the family-valueless language that the blogger that shall not be name uses. It's not something that they want the kids to read.


    If you have a story that you think Whallah! should be covering, feel free to email us at I'd be glad to look into it.

  10. What I would like to know is how other conservative bloggers can defend this man? He's totally off his rocker and I don't get how anyone could defend his bad behavior. His comments are a lot worse than that Buss' comments because he is threatening someone directly...and having read it again there is no borderline about it. He outright threatened someone. BTW...who was he threatening anyways?

  11. In the interest of preservation for posterity I thought I would leave another fine example of the reaction the local hate filled left gets when attempting to discuss important issues with the local kind and tolerant rightwing bloggers. This is not the work of the aforementioned blogger, but his blog is listed in all the same blog rolls. This was left at B&S's.

    "You are not only a naif, you have have proven you are the fool by your comments. I’ve been waterboardered by people I’s called training. As I commented earlier, it’s not pleasant but it’s not torture.

    Show me where the Taliban and the al-Quada signed the Geneva Convention. If it were up to me, I’d just as soon skin them while they hanged. I’d loose no sleep over it, either if I could get valuable info.

    It’s called fighting for a way of life I happen to like. If you want to capitulate, and fight “fair”, well, that’s up to you. As the saying goes, there are no rules in love and war.

    In your case, given your naivete, I wouldn’t piss in your mouth if your tongue was on fire. You’re an idiot. If the muzzies win, you deserve what you get. Me, I’ll be out fighting. No quarter asked, no quarter given.

    And now, something to REALLY piss you off...Merry Christmas!"

  12. I would like to add that not only do I not understand how anyone could defend this man who is obviously disturbed, but, then, have the audacity to claim they have the market cornered on morality and decency.

  13. Fair Play-

    Welcome to my humble castle, madame. Other side has answered your question to whom the aggressive blogger is. The object of his (lack of) affection is Illusory Tenant. IT's mistake was to challenge Peter on his rhetoric and Peter didn't appreciate that.

    While Whallah! tries not to go after private citizens, unless there is great need, we feel it necessary to confront those that echo and support that kind of hate speech. Such as the local right wing squawk radio brigade.