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?

What Religion Would That Be?

Peter DiGaudio is as much fun on twitter as he is on his cyclic blogging. For example, DiGaudio thought this to be worth the re-tweet:


By inference, that must mean that liberals are Christians, since it was the very Christian James T. Harris that claimed to own his daughter.

Throwing Themselves Under the Streetcar

Earlier this week, the Milwaukee Common Council gave the go ahead for the preliminary engineering on putting a streetcar route through downtown Milwaukee.

Needless to say, this got the usual suspects all riled up.

Charlie Sykes started ranting about it on the radio. PaddyMac said that Barrett "hated transit."

The echo chamber, such as Peter DiGaudio and Patrick Dorwin went on the attack.

Obviously, this was all an attempt to take a swipe at Tom Barrett, since their candidate of choice, Scott Walker, is plummeting like a rock in the polls.

Only problem is the same one that usually plagues these folks: Reality doesn't agree with them.

Milwaukee Alderman Robert Bauman issues a press release that shows that the streetcars are just as popular and cost effective as Walker's bus system:

Alderman Bauman, chair of the Common Council’s Public Works Committee and a longtime public transit advocate, said the 2008 data he received from the National Transit Database – the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) primary national database for statistics on the transit industry – and 2009 data directly from the MCTS “clearly shows how the downtown streetcar system will measure up nicely in ridership” with MCTS Freeway Flyer and standard routes.

For instance, he said the 3.6-mile modern street car line is projected to generate daily ridership of 3,800 passengers, a ridership level which exceeds the ridership of all 11 MCTS Freeway Flyer routes and 12 of the 29 MCTS regular trunk routes. The shorter 2.05-mile street car route is projected to generate daily ridership of 1,800 passengers, or a ridership level which also exceeds all 11 Freeway Flyer routes and six of the 29 MCTS regular trunk routes.

When measured by Passengers per Bus Hour (“PBH”), a common industry measure of transit service effectiveness, Alderman Bauman said the Downtown Streetcar Circulator measures up even better. The 3.6-mile modern street car line would generate 51.24 passengers per bus hour. This level exceeds the MCTS system average of 40.33 PBH, far exceeds the PBH of all Freeway Flyer routes, and exceeds the PBH of 24 of the 29 MCTS regular trunk routes. Only MCTS routes 27, 62, 22 and 63 generate a greater PBH.

The streetcar line would generate more passengers per bus hour than the popular route 30 which generates PBH of 50.9, the alderman said.

The shorter 2.05-mile streetcar line would generate PBH of 38.2. This performance level exceeds the PBH of all 11 Freeway Flyer routes and exceeds the PBH of 18 of the 29 regular MCTS trunk routes, he said.

Another common industry measure of transit service effectiveness is “Passengers per Revenue Mile.” According to Alderman Bauman, by this measure, the modern streetcar line also compares well to current MCTS bus service. The 3.6-mile line is projected to generate 5.67 passengers per revenue mile and the 2.05-mile line is projected to generate 4.78 passengers per revenue mile. Both measures exceed the MCTS system average of 3.15 passengers per revenue mile.

I have a feeling those numbers are going to be even higher after the aftermath of Walker's incompetence is truly felt.

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!