There Are No Mirrors In the Dooley Home

Fred Dooley, RWNJ and owner of the most inappropriately named blog in the state, had this to say as he was gloating over 42 WEAC employees losing their jobs:

Wouldn't it be great though to legislate that a select group of people had to use your product and then have the government collect the payment for that product and pass it along to your business?

Now imagine the organization that got that incredible deal regularly gave a percentage of that payment back to one political party in order to ensure that they protected this unethical business model as long as it was possible.

Can you imagine the outrage from that political party when that campaign gravy-train was threatened? Why they might be so mad that they would leave the state in protest!

Interesting thought, isn't it?

Of course, Dooley wouldn't know a thing about a group that received incredible deals and generous giveaways from the government, then turned around and used some of that obscene profit taking to buy politicians of a certain party.

Oh, and by the way, here's a picture of Dooley speaking at a Koch Brothers-sponsored TEA Party rally in Racine:

Need I say more?

Alberta Darling Snubs Local Businesses

This morning, on the Charlie Sykes Incite show (which was mercifully without Sykes, who was no doubt enjoying some union-won time off), Alberta Darling repeatedly complained about the people's boycott of Johnsonville products, as well as Coors, Angel Soft and all the other companies that chose to support the anti-worker, anti-middle class, and anti-freedom Scott Walker.

Darling repeatedly stated that not buying Wisconsin made products was wrong and told people to buy some Johnsonville brats and Coors beer.

Perhaps some intrepid reporter should ask Darling what she has against buying from local companies.

Klement's also makes very tasty brats which are made right here in Milwaukee and don't have the same taint as the corrupt Johnsonville leaders permeating everything about them and their ties to WMC.

And Coors isn't even made in Wisconsin. It's merged partner, Miller, is still made here, but even then, they moved their headquarters out of Milwaukee County and into Illinois. So why in heavens is she saying that we should buy a beer brewed in Colorado and headquartered in Chicago, even while she's saying how we need to buy locally?

If Darling was really pro-Wisconsin, she would have recommended something like Sprecher, the brewery that is wholly right here in Glendale.

To recap, Alberta Darling, who is supposed to be the state senator for the Milwaukee area, in an effort to bash the working class people of all of Wisconsin, is telling people to buy brats made in Sheboygan and beer brewed in Colorado, instead of supporting local companies.

Is it any wonder why people are finding her to be clueless and in desperate need of  having to leave her office?

And as an extra dose of the cognitive dissonance from the right wing, neocon Fred Dooley, worried about a non-existent plan to sticker up grocery stores, goes out to show them union thugs by shopping at Pick'N'Save, which is a union shop. Thanks for supporting your local union members, Fred!

Cross posted at Cog Dis.

Clueless In Racine

Fred Dooley, proprietor of the wildly misnamed "Real Debate Wisconsin" is already a top contender for the O. Henry Prize for Irony for 2011.

Dooley, over the weekend, published a post he titled "Why do liberals hate free speech?"  His whole premise for this ironic post was a story in which a speech to be given by Bristol Palin (about the importance of sexual abstinence, no doubt) was cancelled because some of the students protested her appearance.

First, what should be obvious to anyone not practicing selective outrage would be that this is an example of free speech at work.  The students didn't want their time or tuition money wasted on yet another Palin, and they expressed that feeling successfully and peacefully.  In the end, they won their day, and all is good.

Secondly, should Dooley, who makes a habit of deleting comments from those he doesn't like, if not blocking them entirely, should be criticizing anyone for being against free speech, even though his accusations are so ignorant?

Dooley Plays The "Blame The Victim" Card

Fred Dooley, in an amazing bit of twisted thinking and circular logic, decided what was the real reason that the state legislature failed to pass the union contracts:

If the left wing blogosphere, the unions and all their left wing pals had stuck with Jeff Plale instead of throwing their weight behind a truly radical left wing primary challenger they would have likely been able to get Plale's vote and had their new contracts.

Funny thing is, as Zach and xoff each point out, Plale enjoyed more backing from organized labor, including the very workers he screwed over, than his challenger, Senator-elect Chris Larson.

Thank goodness that old Fred isn't a counselor. With his kind of logic, he'd be telling battered women to stay with their abusers or they'll get what's coming to them.

If he wants to blame the left and the unions for anything, it's for not recognizing Plale for what he was years ago and allowing him to stay in office as long as he has.

The Latest Right Wing Meme: Blame The Victim

I've noticed over the last couple of days that the true nature of the right wing is starting to show themselves, even before they won a single election.

Zach at Blogging Blue picked up on the first one when he noted that Fred Dooley of Real Dimwits of Wisconsin said that a woman deserved to have her head stomped on for exercising her First Amendment right:

I’m not exactly sure what Lauren Valle did that merited being pushed to the ground and having her head stomped on by several men, but it’s curious to me that Fred Dooley is defending the actions of a bunch of overzealous thugs who resorted to physical violence against a woman because she dared to exercise her First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

Likewise, Peter DiGuadio doesn't disappoint in the ignorance department. Peter's first points out a story of a man who was sexually molested as a child by a priest and had snapped and attacked the priest decades later. Peter is correct in the sense that the man had no excuse to physically attack his molester this much later in time. However, Peter couldn't leave well enough alone. First he blames the left, especially Bill Maher.

Then, after a short rant about his favorite boogeyman, the Muslims, Peter shows how deranged he can be (emphasis mine):

I hope the guy who did this gets the max. And yes, to be equitable, he should be charged with a hate crime, since he targeted his victim based on his religion. Oh yeah, that’s right. Whites, males, Christians (especially Catholics) don’t count. Now if the victim had been a Moooslim …

Is DiGuadio really saying the sexual molestation of children is part of the Catholic philosophy? Sure seems like it to me.

Rounding off the trifecta of twits is James T. Harris. Harris is apparently upset about a story that broke, in which Republican Secretary of State candidate Apostle David King is the defendant in a lawsuit claiming that a woman was raped and impregnated by King:

Charlette Harris, 31, said King hired her to work at BuySeasons Inc., a New Berlin firm. During a lunch with him in August, her suit contends, he bought her several mixed drinks and later took her to his apartment. She says she passed out but in September learned she was pregnant. She says she is a lesbian and has not been with any other men.

So how does Harris handle the situation? He calls the rape victim a "crack ho":


If these idiots are like this now, can you imagine what things would be like if the Republicans win in the upcoming election?

And There Goes The Hypocrisy Meter

It just exploded as well.

Thanks, Fred:

The left would rather insult than listen, they'll keep their rabid base but they are losing the country.

"You Probably Think This ORR Is About You"

For a man who has a lot to be humble about.

Real Irony Wisconsin

Irony: Fred Dooley complaining about someone making things up.

Tis The Season To Be Banned

A few months ago, someone or someones started doing some sock puppetry, using my name on Badger Blogger. Even though it was shown not to be me, I was blocked from their site. (Meh, no great loss for me.) (Even though they admit that they were having these problems, they have yet to apologize.)

The same thing has been going on around the blogosphere, including at this very site. The most recent victim is Fred Dooley, who accused Mike Mathias and I of doing things completely out of our character. Even when this was pointed out to Dooley, he claimed that "he checked" and confirmed it was us.

Lo and behold, Dooley finally figures he was duped, and apologizes to those whose names who had been used. However, he makes no mention of how he had "checked" and confirmed it was us, which should raise suspicion in anyone's eyes about what statements Dooley makes that might be true and which ones are false.

In all of the hoopla, Zach Wisniewski points out the hypocrisy that Dooley has shown over the years on what he tolerates from the right, but won't take a fraction of from the left. For his troubles, Zach joined a growing list of impressive people by getting banned himself.

And in related news, Charlie Sykes has just started using twitter. I am proud to say that I am one of the first, if not the first person he has blocked from following his account.
That said, I can still read it, so it is nothing more than a minor nuisance. Look for more fun with this.

More Painkillers, I Presume.

Now those scamps at RDW are praying for the Pres. Of course they're doing it in their own inimitable style.

If you look up Fred's reference you get to this uplifting verse.

8 May his days be few;
may another take his place of leadership.

9 May his children be fatherless
and his wife a widow.

10 May his children be wandering beggars;
may they be driven [d] from their ruined homes.

11 May a creditor seize all he has;
may strangers plunder the fruits of his labor.

12 May no one extend kindness to him
or take pity on his fatherless children.

13 May his descendants be cut off,
their names blotted out from the next generation.

It's not really one of the "feel-good" psalms.

Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Most political junkies are already aware that Fred Dooley, proprietor of Real Dimwit Wisconsin and "official blogger" for the MacGuyver Institution threw out a racist tweet.

It's been covered by most lefty bloggers including Zach and Al at Blogging Blue, One Wisconsin Now, and Cory Liebmann. It was even covered by a right winger, Rabbit.

Mike Mathias and Harris Kane not only cover the story, but argue that Fred should be fired from the Institution.

I would respectfully disagree with this stance. The MacGuyverians do not have to fire Dooley.

This is still America, and we do have rights. Dooley has a right to write what he wants, no matter how ignorant it might be, as long as it is not slanderous or libel, or would endanger public safety unnecessarily. Just as we have the right to point out that they are being fronted by a guy that makes racist tweets, and then fails to own up to his responsibility.

Right Wing Tank Thinker Is Now Against Tax Cuts For Business

The serious people speak. "Attracting business to Wisconsin is not government's job."

Now My Feelings Are Really Hurt

Fred Dooley just don't like me:

I don't know, is being put into Limbo better or worse than just an outright ban?

So much for a real debate, too.

Say What?

Them bitter clingers had Christmas come early when the corrupt governor from Illinois (Rod Blagojevich-D) was arrested for being a first degree sleazeball. The righties didn't have much to celebrate until then, and were busy licking their wounds from the elections and trying to start impeachment hearings against Obama before he was even sworn in.

On of the most bitter-clinging haters was that goofball, Fred Dooley, of Real Dumbass Wisconsin.

Dooley at 1:18 pm in the afternoon, when most gainfully employed adults are at work, posted this nonsense, whining that not enough liberals were bashing Blago. Not only was he counting (though he must have problems with math problems involving two integer numbers, judging from the comment section), he was taking it upon himself to critique any posts that were written by liberal bloggers. And then he couldn't even have the decency to spell Cognitive Dissidence correctly.

This is from a guy who is so fairly unbalanced in his own blogging that his posts include:

On Larry Craig, who is still guilty of trying to solicit sex in an airport bathroom, Fred wrote this.

On David Vitter, who was on Washington Madame's list of favored shoppers, Fred wrote this.

On Christopher Thomas, a little boy who was murdered, and part of the blame falls on Alberta Darling's Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, Fred compassionately wrote this.

And for the real kicker, on Michael Gableman, who, like Annette Ziegler, starts his time on the Supreme Court under a cloud of doubt, as he is trying to defend the indefensible. And Fred's take on Gableman's wrong-doings? Well, he didn't write any. Nothing. Zilch. Nada.

But not only did he not write any posts condemning Gableman for his misbehavior, nor any calling for his ouster, but the posts on his site regarding Gableman are either endorsements or defenses of the miscreant. This is not surprising. After all, there is photographic evidence that Fred likes to associate with these kinds of scofflaws:



But you got to give it to Dooley on one thing. What he lacks in propriety, he makes up with chutzpah.

Mike Mathias sure appreciates him though.

Fred Dooley Again

I swear this guy really has no clue. From a post at Real Rebate Debate Wisconsin about "unhinged gay activists" there is this from Fred.

Andrew at Weazel Zippers makes a great point, Muslim groups also supported Prop 8, why didn't they burn a Koran on the door step of a mosque? Never mind, we all know the answer to that question.....

We're waiting for the answer from Fred. But then, in the comment section, Fred writes this:

Default mode for you liberals is to diminsh then make a ridiculous comparrison without any basis in fact.

Who knew? Fred's a liberal by his own definition?

Fred Dooley: The Epitome Of Hypocrisy

Shortly after the election, right wing blogger Peter DiGaudio made some outrageous comments on his site, Texas Hold'em Blogger, as well as some comments on Boots and Sabers, that could be considered to be criminal. This drew a rather large amount of criticism from the left, like the Prodigal Brawler and Zach, as well as some conservatives, like James Wigderson.

I chose not to write about it for a few reasons. One, I know Peter has a history of flying of the handle and saying irresponsible and totally unacceptable things. Secondly, I do believe, based on what I saw, and from what others have told me, that Peter does have a clinically diagnosable mental health issue. I have a different perspective than most, as that my training and my career is based on helping those with mental illness. Thirdly, with everyone else piling on him, both publicly and privately, I did not feel that I would have anything to add, and did not want to add to any issues Peter might have. Another major reason for my silence on the issue was simply that I had bigger fish to fry.

Well, Peter, in a fit of pique, chose to delete his entire site. A few days later, he came back with a new site. Badger Blogger and Fred Dooley both proudly announced it, but had never publicly denounced the original problematic posts and comments. This caused them a bit of grief, I'm sure. Again, I said nothing, because this was what I expected from them, unfortunately.

Dooley became so incensed with the criticism, that he felt compelled to put up a post explaining his actions. Now, for the uninitiated, Dooley is an extreme right wing blogger that has problems with polite interactions. His site, mistitled "Real Debate Wisconsin" is anything but that. Dooley has the tendency to use irresponsible rhetoric and over the top hyperbole from time to time as well.

He has also banned many people from his site, mostly for the sin of disagreeing with him. The most recent being another one of our prodigal contributors, Other Side.

Dooley also hates a lot of people, including yours truly. He has written many posts and comments attacking me personally and attacking this site. One of the many insults he flailed about in my general direction was that I am some sort of sexist, just because I had the audacity to disagree with Jessica McBride.

So, you can see, I was just amazed at the level of hypocrisy when Dooley wrote this:

In short, these complainers are the same people who don't seem to have any problem with similar speech from the left. If you'd like to see the local equivalent of Peter's work on the left, do a search for Blue Racine. That's a particularly vile and vulgar site that these same paragons of virtue complaining about myself, Peter and Patrick @ Badger Blogger have no issues at all with. Funny how an acerbic conservative bothers them yet they have no issues at all with acerbic lefties. I prefer to just ignore them, they are not worthy of any energy or effort on my part, I have enough to do.

Yup, Dooley, who had accused me of sexism for disagreeing with a woman, calls a site run by a woman vile and vulgar. Interestingly, one of the contributors at his site is also a contributor at Blue Racine. Perhaps it's just a jealousy issue. More likely it's hypocrisy.

Another funny thing is that none of his commenters found anything vulgar or vile about Blue Racine. In fact, many of the commenters remark that Fred's site is much, much worse than this site.

So, let's review.

• He calls me sexist for disagreeing with McBride, but then attacks a woman, calling her site vile and vulgar.
• The site he calls vile and vulgar is found by independent commenters to be anything but that, but do notice that his site is actually vile and vulgar.
  
• He says that he ignores us terrible, terrible lefties, but felt that he had to respond.
• He calls his site Real Debate, when he bans people for disagreeing with him.
  

About the only way Dooley could have been more hypocritical is by telling someone that they need to seek out mental health counseling.

And has an added bonus to his ridiculousness, we have another comment on Dooley's post from the (in)famous mickey/gus:

Allah-is-a-ok, isn't that far from the truth.
Libs have been known to burn the flag. Virulent strains of LIBTARD-ism still do.
Libs have been known to pretend that VIOLENT ISLAMOFASCISTS...(a "virulent strain" of Islam), are not a threat and need libs protection.
Libs are known to support groups and individuals that will not work and are a drain on society. They have "lot's of time" on their hands.

Lastly, Patriots support, defend and love America.
Libtards don't. They believe others should support, defend and love America. Libs want an America that is weak and full of lazy weak libtards.
And Allah-is-a-ok, thinks taxing those who have achieved is a bottomless LIBBY-BANK.
Libs want an America that is funded by successful people, and Libs want to punish the successful, because LIBS constituents are generally weak and not successful.
Thanks Allah-is-a-ok!

A Sign Of The Apocalypse?

Things are getting too weird now, even for me. I cannot think of a clearer sign that this may be the end times, but when Fred Dooley, at Real Debate Wisconsin, does a Whallah! type post:

Yelling's Derby Picks.

Mark Yelling has been sharing his extensive horse racing expertise with his listeners on triple crown races for years.

He does have a history of success in his picks, this year... Not so much.

Here are Belling's top five picks in the order that he predicted them and where they actually finished.

1st - Visionair - finished 12th
2nd - Fortune - finished 10th
3rd - Cool Coal Man - finished 15th
4th - Big Brown - finished 1st
5th - Court Vision - finished 13th

I guess this is why they call it gambling. Keep picking Mark, you can't win them all.

I have to go lie down now. I don'f feel so well all of a sudden.

What Is It With Them?

What is it with the right wing nutters and my poor deceased mother?

First, Fred Dooley insults her and to tries to tarnish her memory. (He still owes me an apology.)

Now our newest form of John, Mickey, launches on her poor soul. In a post at Badger Blogger, I posed a serious question on whether anyone knew exactly when Scott Walker dropped out of Marquette. Mickey starts in on some nonsense how I, or apparently any liberal, would rape their mother for power.

I responded by pointing out that my dear mother is deceased, and that I would appreciate it if he would leave her out of the discussion.

What do I get for my polite request? This piece of crap:



It equally sad to see that the owner and operators at said blog did nothing to condemn such vulgarity (nor did anyone answer my question.)

Finally, I would be greatly remiss if I did not express my gratitude to Grumps and Jay Bullock for calling out on this atrocity.

Going Beyond The Pale

Before I say anything else, I would like to thank my readers and my friends for their public and private showings of support in the matter I am going to discuss.

As most of you know, I also have the privilege and honor of being able to post items at folkbum's rambles and rants. And as most of you also know, even though lately my focus has been heavily on the race for Milwaukee County Executive, I do post on various subjects, just not the blathering that emanates from squawk radio.

One of the subjects that I have posted about is my mother, who passed away from breast cancer eight and a half years ago. I loved my mother, and still miss her to this day. As she laid in her hospital bed, with my then-fiancee, now wife at my side, she made sure to tell me that she loved me, and that she was proud of the man I became.

Knowing this, one can imagine my anger when I saw the comments from Fred Dooley on this post. Dooley first wrote:

Throwing around the race card Capper?

Could it be that Coggs was showing bad form on intruding on someone else's press conference?

Kane is a cartoon....

Inserting labels and throwing them around without an ounce of proof.

That's low for even you.

Your mother must be so proud.

I pointed out to Dooley that my he was incorrect, as usual, and that my mother was deceased. I told him that I expected an apology for insulting her. Instead of realizing that he went over the top, and being a man about things, the reprobate took it further beyond the pale:

Dream on Capper.

You are the one throwing the racism label on the tab.

Writing about someoene[sic] of color does not make someone a racist.

People like you just throw labels around and never accept responsiblity[sic] for your own bad behavior. You would rather attack the scribe than consider that they just might have a point.

I'm sure your mother would not be proud of this side of you, attacking people without cause or evidence. I am sure your activity insults her, and I am sure I have not.

Now, I am an adult, and can handle confrontation, as when Dooley started to spread his poisonous vitriol on the blogsite of Fair Play, directing it at anyone and everyone. This is the same Dooley that bans people at the drop of a hat for saying something that he doesn't like. He has even banned Fair Play, who is about as level headed as they come.


Even more tiresome, like your average blogyard bully, Dooley then goes running home and whines like a spoiled little brat on how everyone is soooo mean to him. In the process, he only spreads more bovine fecal matter than the fertilizer spreaders on any ten farms.

Like I said, I can handle confrontation. He can call me whatever he wants, because it won't bother me. First of all, everyone knows that he is nothing more than a pompous, boorish lout. Second of all, he means nothing to me, and his words have no power over me. But when someone goes after another person's mother, that shows the true wretchedness in that person's soul. What he did is as deplorable as what Michael McGee, Sr. did to Charlie Sykes, when Sykes' mother passed away last year.

SIDENOTE: The picture was swiped from Brass League, formerly known as Other Side of My Mouth.

He Can't Handle The Truth

The word debate can be defined as: To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.

Apparently, that is not the definition Fred Dooley chooses.

He is again going through selective outrage and melodramatic histrionics. The selective outrage came from, what could be described at worst as a misinterpretation but is really nothing more than semantics. The melodramatic came from a slight from a commentator that he chose to conflate to much larger proportions than was needed. Now, apparently feeling the need for attention, Dooley again goes into histrionics, this time using me as the object of his "affection." This seems to be a pattern for him, doesn't it?

Now he has decided to target me for his hissy fit:

That brings me to Capper who wanted to know last night why I had deleted one of his comments yesterday (now 3). Capper attacks me personally on his website and in comments at every other opportunity across the web. Then he comes here and tries to play nice with his attacks. I’m tired of his antics.

This would be like a bully hitting you at every opportunity wanting to be welcomed into your home because he had not hit you there.

I’ve said before that tone matters. Capper’s tone towards this blog and this blogger are atrocious everywhere except here. I’ve decided to no longer give him a pass on this. If Capper would like to add to an issue and do so in a proper manner he is welcome to do so (as is PCD) but he has worn out his welcome on snark from his own actions across the net.

For the record, he did indeed erase three of my comments. Of course, the thing he doesn't want to tell you is what my comments were. Fred had put up a post regarding the AFP Defending the American Nightmare event. In his post Fred included this paragraph:

Sheriff David Clarke made a couple of interesting points. In four consecutive budgets the Sheriff has returned money to the county. (I wish more department heads were so responsible) He also shared a plan he had to privatize a small part of the prisoner transfer process. That procedural change would have saved the county $1.5 million over five years. The Finance Committee voted it down 7 to 0 saying they would NEVER vote against union jobs. Who do these people work for anyway, the taxpayers or the unions? Wait, we know the answer to that one apparently.

I left a comment asking if Clarke had mentioned all the money he has cost the taxpayers with all of the lawsuits that he has lost. (By the way, if you think I was making up my points about Clarke, go here.)

That's it. I didn't mention Fred, insult him in any way, or use any vulgarities. All I did was point out that Clarke is not exactly the taxpayer's friend. But he still deleted it. I left a second comment asking why deleted the first one. He deleted this one as well. Dooley did send me an email in which he wrote:

You want to know why I deleted your comment.

Because it offered nothing. Good people put on a good event and you have to come in and try and slime it. It's mean and hateful, par for your course.

You continually slime me on your blog and on virtually every place you see me leave comment on the web.

I'm tired of it.

Be civil and offer something of worth or I will not welcome your comments. Your continued pattern matters and I'll look at the entirerty of your work rather than judge it comment by comment.

I'm sure this will generate another ridiculous post showing me as some ridiculous hard case. Go ahead what else is new, you'll show half the story and draw whatever your conclusions you want.

I don't know any reason why I should welcome someone at my blog who seems to have nothing better to do than attack me at every opportunity.

I have better things to do.

I then wrote a third comment agreeing to his request for civility and said that I expected the same in return. He deleted this one as well. I really fail to see how any of this is hateful or slimy. Perhaps Fred just is unable to differentiate himself from his blog, or from his opinions.

I should also mention that there are plenty of examples of Dooley going around stalking other people he is mad at, with the most recent target being Jay Bullock. I suppose he will start doing that with me now as well.

I could go into this further, but I won't. I could point out all of the true debates I have had, on respectful, if not amicable terms, with various conservatives, but that would start being too redundant. I just wanted to have it clarified what Fred considers "slime" as opposed to be a "real debate."

If you are reading this Fred, I would encourage you to go back to the top of this post and reread the definition of the word debate. Then compare that to the phrase "echo chamber." Judging from some of the comments left on your post slamming me, I am not alone in the perception that you have the two terms confused.

I don't expect this to change anyone's opinion. Those that know me, already know what the truth is.