James Wigderson Lied About Walker's Record On Labor

On April 25, James Wigderson attacked Mayor Tom Barrett, saying that Barrett had lied when he said that Scott Walker was for right to work.  Wigderson emphatically declared that Walker is not in favor of a right to work legislation:

Walker supports private sector unions and even the “prevailing wage” for public projects, and he is opposed to Right to Work legislation.

As it turns out, it is Wigderson, not Barret, who is the bald faced liar.

As my co-author at Cog Dis, Jeff Simpson, points out, there is now footage of Scott Walker discussing making Wisconsin a right to work state.

Per the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article that Jeff cites, we see this exchange between Walker and Diane Hendricks, a big time right wing nut job who likes to associate with the same crowd as Walker (see Koch Brothers) and is reported to freely lend her private plane to Walker as he goes jaunting about the country collecting his bail money from those who would buy our state if we let them:

In the video, Hendricks told Walker she wanted to discuss "controversial" subjects away from reporters, asking him:

"Any chance we'll ever get to be a completely red state and work on these unions -"

"Oh, yeah," Walker broke in.

"- and become a right-to-work?" Hendricks continued. "What can we do to help you?"

"Well, we're going to start in a couple weeks with our budget adjustment bill," Walker said. "The first step is we're going to deal with collective bargaining for all public employee unions, because you use divide and conquer. So for us, the base we get for that is the fact that we've got - budgetarily we can't afford not to. If we have collective bargaining agreements in place, there's no way not only the state but local governments can balance things out . . . That opens the door once we do that. That's your bigger problem right there."

The entire conversation was not released Thursday with a video trailer of the documentary, but Journal Sentinel reporters were allowed to view the raw footage, in which the governor goes on to talk about curbing liability lawsuits and government regulations.

If you don't believe that the paper accurately reflected the conversation, you can see it for yourself in this preview of the movie "As Goes Janesville." The conversation starts around the 7:40 mark.

The MJS article also notes that Walker sponsored right to work legislation as a freshman legislator in 1993.

But since Wigderson considers himself to be a reputable writer and has threatened anyone and everyone he perceives as impugning his reputation, I look forward to see him suing himself. After all, I'm sure he doesn't like that he made himself look even worse than he normally does.

IOOKIARDI - Marriage Edition

In today's installment of "It's Only OK If A Republican Does It," we turn to James Wigderson.

Wigderson takes umbrage with the fact that the left has been pointing out "self-made millionaire" RoJo became self-made by marrying into it.

Wigderson then decides to bring up Russ Feingold's marriage history:

However, do Wisconsin Democrats really want to go into whether or not Johnson was “lucky” in whom he married (for over 30 years)? Which of Senator Russ Feingold’s three wives was the lucky charm for him? Or will it be number four? After all, the plural of spouse is “spice” and right now Feingold is on a pace to pass Larry King. I would assume that Feingold supporters would be doing everything they can to keep a candidate’s personal life off limits. Yet Feingold and his supporters keep going back to mentioning Johnson’s personal life.

We at Whallah! anxiously await Wigderson's pieces on Charlie Sykes and Jessica McBride's marital and extramarital exploits. The one on Sykes will probably be in a few weeks, to time it with Liz Woodhouse Day.

An Entitlement Program He Will Drink To

Patrick McIlheran has found an entitlement program that he could really dive into: Water for Waukeshans:

Milwaukee's revival will come not by forcing the most urban area in Waukesha County to hand over money. It will come by making itself an attractive part of a thriving metro area. The region can thrive if its parts cooperate. Cooperation doesn't include extortion, though it can include $1 million donations from suburban-based companies to health care for the poor in Milwaukee, as GE made the other day.

Here's an idea: Strike a deal for the water. Strike a deal just about water. My city should drop the stupid, pushy resolution and the shoulder chip before Waukesha figures out it can get lake water from Oak Creek or river water from the Fox at perhaps higher cost but with fewer hysterics.

I guess entitlements are OK...as long as you pass McIlheran's worthiness test. Or maybe Xoff hit dead on when he questions if this is actually a message from God:

Apparently, God hates suburban sprawl, too. Who knew?

Or is Paddy Mac suggesting that God thinks it's OK to drink radium-tainted water, but was overruled by the EPA?

I can see Paddy joining up with James Wigderson and holding a lemonade stand to help promote their cause. Just make sure what water they are using before you buy any.

Reagan's Eleventh Commandment Doesn't Work In Wisconsin

Ronald Reagan had a line he called the Eleventh Commandment that was basically this:

"Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican."

Reagan's catchphrase helped the Republicans stay together and stay on message for a long time. But that was a long time ago, in a place far away.

In Wisconsin, things are much, much different for those on the right. They are so full of hate and anger, they'll attack anyone, including each other.

We saw that over the weekend at the Koch Industry-sponsored TEA party, in which Team Duffy tried to gang up on his primary opponent, Dan Mielke. They are mad at Mielke for pointing out that Duffy isn't conservative to be a Republican's Republican.

Now we are seeing this sort of behavior spilling out over locally.

Our local alcohol-fueled loudmouth, Kevin Fischer, decided to take on James Wigderson over something really trivial, like daylight savings time.

Wiggy, taking full advantage of having about 100 more IQ points than Fischer, goes Whallah! all over the Fisch:

State Senator Mary Lazich’s staffer, Journal Sentinel blogger, and WISN fill-in Kevin Fischer goes off the deep end. At least he used a good picture. I could have a contest to determine what is the point of his blog post, but I’m betting it would be a contest without winners. I’m guessing one of three things happened:

1) Someone put ketchup on his bratwurst.
2) He was trapped in a car with Jeff Wood, with THE WINDOWS ROLLED UP.
3) He did research on St Patrick’s Day early.

While that was entertaining, I actually think Fischer was closer to the truth with this:

I have no business possessing thoughts of my own because I’m just a lowly state employee, a lowly legislative aide, a lowly state Senate employee. And I get to go on radio and TV??? OH MY GOD, THE INJUSTICE!

No, Kevin, you have no thought processes, so you have no business pretending you do, much less collecting one dime of tax payer money while you prove that you don't think.

Conservative Women Show Real Class

Megan McCain, daughter of U.S. Senator John McCain (R-the desert), had started her own blog to talk about her feelings during her father's failed run for POTUS. She has kept up the blogging, and apparently recently took some conservative squawkers, like Ann Coulter, to task about something.

Another nationally known squawker, Laura Ingraham, went on the attack. But not for her politics, or for what she said or did, but for her looks:

After McCain, 24, criticized Anne Coulter and other far right conservatives in an online column, political commentator Laura Ingraham heckled her on her radio show last week. She said the daughter of former presidential nominee John McCain was "just another Valley Girl gone awry." She then mocked McCain in a faux Valley Girl voice, saying that she didn't get a "role in the Real World" because "they don't like plus-sized models."

I will be honest and admit that I have never listed to Ingraham, except for the clips I've heard when she ripped on Brett Favre the first time he retired. But from what I've read, she appears to be strictly one of those shock type of squawkers, like Michael Savage or Rush Limbaugh or An Coulter, who say obnoxious things like that just to draw attention to themselves.

It tells me two things about these types of people. One is that they don't have an intellectual view on anything, and are only trying to get the other person upset to throw them off balance.

The other thing is that they must be feeling very insecure and/or have a very low self-esteem that the only way that they can build themselves up is to tear other people down.

James Wigderson, a conservative local blogger, also has some views on the subject. He does start out rather well, but then kind of loses it with a desperate "they do it too" type of defense for it. But it is still worth a look see.

Yeah, I See What You Guys Mean About The Creepiness

Little children singing for a politician is scary. Dear God, people. Get a grip.

Someone Slipped James Wigderson A Mickey

For those of you that are new, or may have simply forgotten, here is a brief background on mickey.

mickey is an extreme righty commenter that could be immediately identified by his immature name-calling, his spastic keyboard, and his over the top personal attacks. Because he is so often so far out of control, he has been banned from various right wing sites, like Booots and Sabers and Badger Blogger.

mickey had disappeared for a while, but like a bad penny, he has shown up again. The only difference is that he now uses the name "gus". He still had the same name-calling and the same over the top personal attacks. Now it appears his keyboard appears to have had a relapse.

In a post in which James bit on the false flag story, mickey/gus has shown that he is already in mid-season form:


Folktunes, Obama is not patriotic.
You cannot impugn someones Patriotism, when the person "impugned" is not patriotic.
Jay, a bit of advice??? N'est ce pas???
Get off of the Obama-wagon. He is a complete and utter LOSER. CAPITAL L, CAPITAL O, CAPITAL S...yet get my drift Jay???
Or Jay, you can make a bigger ass of yourself.Kerry was a Fraud, Obama is a waist of time......Gore????
Jay, are you a "Gore man"?
Jay, do you see a PATTERN DEVELOPING?
Jay, you are a decent guy, but you are being SUCKERED by those you desperately want to believe in.
Cutting to the chase Jay.
Santa Claus does NOT exist.
Jay, CARING, does not make you BETTER.CARING has no value.gus

09.06.08 - 11:20 pm #

Is Wiggy going Whallah!?

From the Library and Pub:

Is Mary Lazich stealing Kevin Fischer's sandwich from the office 'fridge and this is his subtle way of telling her to knock it off? Fischer explains why lunches are stolen at the office and who are the likely culprits.

But who in their right mind would want to eat what Fischer eats?

Free Speech

Ah, is a King's work never done?

After returning from a lovely weekend in the countryside, I come back to find a plea for help. It seems that at issue is the issue of free speech, as protected by the First Amendment.

McBride, in her weekly space-filler at the Waukesha Freeman, takes state Representative Don Pridemore to task for suggesting a bill that would require third party groups running ads in elections to name the people that donate to their cause. As usual, McBride's argument is convoluted and circular. She tries to make a point, but offers no rationale behind her point. For a more clear and well written piece on this issue, I found Owen Robinson, in on of his rare posts of more than a few words, to be much clearer in presenting the issues.

Now, obviously, I don't have a problem with anonymity, as that neither capper, nor King of the Left Hate, are the names that my parents gave to me. Nor is my real name Liz Woodhouse. However, I am also a mere blogger. I am but a single voice among the thousands on the Internet. My influence on any given election is negligible, as evidenced by Walker's re-election. Oh sure, sometimes a blogger will strike gold and find a piece of information that could change an election drastically, but those times are rare.

The same can't be said for the third party ads. Their influence on elections are undeniable. Every election cycle, our TVs, our radios and even some web pages, like the JSOnline, are inundated in political ads. Many, if not most, of these ads are produced and paid for by these third parties. They have also become increasingly negative and vulgar, and often play very loosely with the facts. All one has to do is look at the latest kerfuffle regarding All Children Matter to see some of the problems with these groups.

In his post, Owen argues that naming the people that contribute to these organizations could have some real, and some very negative, impact on the people that donate, without really affecting the outcomes of the elections. I respectfully disagree with him.

While Owen's scenarios could hold true, that is only if the person continues to donate to these groups. The person also has a right to contribute to any group or movement that is more responsible on how they get their message out. There may still be repercussions, but that is much less likely if there are no slanderous statements made in the first place.

I don't know if there is a solution that everyone could be happy with, but I personally believe that there is some sort of compromise possible. Something to the effect that anyone donating less than a set amount, say $100 to a movement, can remain private. This way, most average individuals would have their privacy remain intact, but the people that would be more of an impact player would be named, so that people can see who's really behind a group. This way, the average citizen could still support whatever cause they wish to without fear of repercussion, but those with greater sway and swag would be identified, and their real intents may become clearer.

One other issue that demonstrates McBride's poor journalistic skill is her use of attributions, or lack thereof. McBride writes:

The speculation derived from a blogger who admits she was completely making it up. The best line came from Freeman columnist James Wigderson, who opined that he’d like to see my husband in the state Assembly because "after the first meeting he’d probably demand mandatory Breathalyzer checks for his colleagues."

Now, I am sure James is pleased to see his name in print again, being the publicity hound that he is. But why wouldn't she name the other blogger, who actually helped to inspire at least this paragraph, and several posts? Is it jealousy? Or is there some other reason, like maybe Paul is really toying with an idea of running?

Who knows? But for those of you who might have missed it, as I wrote last week, the blogger is Cindy Kilkenny, and this is her post.

And on an ending note, it is no wonder that McBride would be against this sort of bill. She is probably afraid that if it was noted that, say she or her husband, had donated to one of these sliming agencies, she might receive the same treatment that she gives to other people who chose to cast aside their cloak of anonymity.

A Spectacle of Speculations

Earlier this week, as some of you may have noticed, McBride closed her blogs to the public. Yesterday, Xoff informed us that McBride self-reported that she closed the blogs due to "being too busy."

All of this has led to a small wildfire of speculation as to why McBride deprived us of her witticism and biting insight (well, something about her insight really bit).

There's been speculation that it may be due to pressure from her husband, Paul Bucher, the super trial lawyer, and a big case he is active in.

Likewise, there's been some that wonder if it deals with a lawsuit the Buchers have filed.

Some have proposed that UWM had finally put pressure on her to knock it off.

Then there is some thought that this could stem from a possible actionable offense done during the lead up to the Supreme Court elections.

Cindy Kilkenny offered us a plausible theory that Paul is again planning to run for an office again.
This theory appears to have been debunked by Owen Robinson and James Wigderson.

Another theory is that she was just sick and tired of being bombarded with criticism in her messages and emails. (But why would anyone question her? She's a UWM School of Journalism "faculty member", dang it!)

As for yours truly, I have no idea why she did what she did. Nor do I really care. While it is true that I, and the others here at Whallah!, have watched her like a hawk, and was always happy to point out flaws to her logic and arguments, I personally hold no animosity towards McBride or Bucher. Just to their wrong-headed, mean-spirited stances.

If something comes out of this, of course we will notify you,, the reader, about it. In the mean time, we will enjoy the silence, and pick up where we left off with Sykes, Belling and the rest.

Score One For Wiggy

I know James Wigderson isn't technically part of the local right wing media.

Nor is Ann Coulter, thankfully.

But sometimes things are too good to pass up.

Sir Wiggy's post on Ann is one of them:

Ann Coulter describing Barack Obama's book, “Dreams From My Father.”:

Has anybody read this book? Inasmuch as the book reveals Obama to be a flabbergasting lunatic, I gather the answer is no. Obama is about to be our next president: You might want to take a peek. If only people had read “Mein Kampf” ...

I must've missed the part where Obama wanted to eradicate the Jews and invade Poland.

As an added bonus for us, and a burden for Sir Wiggy, there are some classics from mickey in the comments thread.

Lines in the Sand

I hope that Sir Zachary the Blue Knight does not mind, but I also wish to add my two cents worth to the question of "Where's The Line?"

It has long been a peeve of mine that people like Sykes are able to give their pet politicians like Scott Walker and David Clarke (yes, Clarke is a politician, cuz he sure isn't worth squat as an enforcer of the law) a platform that includes free air time on his show and on his blog. It seems highly unfair that anyone running against these people doesn't receive the same kind of consideration from TMJ. But then again, since when has TMJ been know to be anything more than a shill for the conservative agenda anyway?

Oh, I know the usual arguments from the right. It's not a news show, it's entertainment. Sykes is just expressing his opinions. We need to counter the liberal MSM (wherever that might be is beyond me). All they are doing is trying to rationalize their misbehaviors.

But do these arguments hold water when the squawker is also a state employee? Especially when said employee is working for a state senator, who just so happens to be up for re-election in the fall?

As Zach pointed out, Fischer has now made the "big announcement" that he is going to be back on the air at WISN. (Given his sexist posts, he would be a good match for WISN, as I previously pointed out.)

I would like to point out that Sir James, librarian and barkeep extraordinaire, has a very reasonable and balanced post with some very good points. James also questioned whether this meant that Fischer would be leaving his postion as state Senator Mary Lazich's aide.

In the comments section, Fischer replied that he was not, and took what I thought was an unfair swipe at James, lumping him in, for the second time, with us low down dirty liberals.

James, the gentleman that he is, ignored the swipe, but did respond with some excellent points and questions. James comment is so good, that I will post it here, in its entirety:

Perhaps Kevin given your public role in a state senator's office it would be more responsible not to keep secret your "expanded role" with Clear Channel.

That said, do you think it's appropriate for a "News Talk" radio station to have as one of it's on-air personalities someone who works for the state legislature in a political role? When you were a practicing journalist, what would your reaction have been?

What is your view of a newspaper depending on politicians and their staff for content that they sell to the public? Do you not see the potential for conflict in both cases?

I realize it's not your problem. It's the problem of Journal Communications and Clear Channel. But unless your expanded role at WISN is cleaning the floors, your own journalism background should make you uncomfortable with the arrangements they have made.

james wigderson Homepage 02.18.08 - 9:13 pm #

Again, I have to ask, especially given Fischer's role at Lazich's aide, even if it is perfectly legal, is it ethical? Of course, I would say no, but I'm just biased towards fairness.

Wiggy

James Wigderson is a conservative blogger, a columnist at the Waukesha Freeman, and a friend of McBride's. He has also taken umbrage with Whallah's posts about the whole La La Brown murder and McBride's poor response to it.

James is a fairly intelligent person, with a good sense of humor. But in his post, he inadvertently points out the errors that McBride has made. He argues that one should not judge a book by a cover, but that there are generalities that one can use. He points out that it would be likelier that a recording studio in the inner city would be used for gangsta rap than for country or classical music. This is probably true, but it is also a stereotype. While most young black people probably do listen to rap or hip hop, not all do.

This kind of thinking leads to stereotypical thinking, which can lead to racism. He even commits the same error, in wondering if the fact that Whallah is dedicated to correcting McBride's wrong-headed comments and positions, makes it sexist. It doesn't matter what McBride's gender or color is, wrong is wrong. To think otherwise, is sexist in itself.

For another rebuttal to Wiggy's post, take a walk to the Other Side.

Addendum: It must be pointed out that the La La Brown incident wasn't a single event for McBride. She has developed a discernible pattern of focusing on issues involving minorities and treating these issues in a dismissive manner. That would easily give to the fact that there appears to be at least some latent racism occurring.