Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is McBride

McBride again takes on her favorite role of martyr as she lashes out at Whallah contributor Xoff, who wrote about her failure to produce any statistical data to substantiate her argument. She starts out with:

I don't read liberal abuse-hate blogs. Why bother? It's juvenile, sexist stuff that belongs on a junior high school playground. (although I do sometimes marvel at how obsessed they are when readers send stuff my way. They spend so much time and energy...)

.

She may not read liberal abuse-hate blogs, but she does write and read conservative abuse-hate blogs. She also should be aware that it is pretty quick and easy to point out the fallacies in most of her posts. But even as she complains that Whallah is juvenile, she continues with:

.

Bill Christofferson, the slime merchant and Democratic political strategist who was behind all those nasty Mark Green ads, is apparently now turning his trash machine my way...

.

Whallah, McBride's version of maturity.

.

She focuses on one line of Xoff's argument, denying that she wants all illegal immigrants to be deported, but ignores the context of his post, trying to distort the point he was trying to convey. Just like she accuses liberals of doing to her, as she continues with her tirade:

.

The liberals know it. But they simply don't care. They distort everything they can to achieve their political goals, like when they falsely said I was mocking a little girl's death when they knew I was mocking Eugene Kane for not having the guts to debate and had actually made the point that the little girl's death was a crisis. You have to wonder why the partisan left in this state has made it such a priority to try to silence me. I am in good company. It simply fortifies me.

.

Ah, yes, the Eugene Kane incident...It is good to she is over that and has moved on with her life.

.

But the best part is when she claims that the left is trying to silence her. Why would the left want to silence her? She is, single-handedly, the best thing that could happen to bolster the arguments of the left, with the possible exception of George Bush himself.

.

Addendum: After two of McBride's acolytes offer solace and comfort for the poor, unfairly persecuted McBride, she adds a comment of her own: When you can't win the argument....

.

Seeing as that she apparently couldn't finish the thought, we will help her. When you can't win the argument...Whallah, you claim to be a martyr and stop letting the winners post comments on your blog.

No statistics? Well, tell a scary story

Vintage McBride. Priceless.

She complains that those awful liberals complain about people like her, who inflame anti-immigrant sentiment by trying to find an illegal immigrant behind every crime.

It's not fair that liberals complain about that, she says.

Her "evidence" is an article describing the backlash against illegal immigration: The crux of her objection to the article is this sentence:

The [Newark triple murder] case revitalized an argument made during the congressional debate that the flow of illegal immigrants, though predominated by job-seekers lured by the prospect of higher wages and better conditions, includes a menacing criminal element.

It's not just an "argument," McBride says. It's a fact that illegals are committing lots of crimes and terrorizing American citizens.

Why, McBride asks, doesn't the writer offer some statistics:

Why not just look up the known numbers, Mr. Montgomery? (of course, in many states, like ours, no one really knows how many illegal immigrant criminals there are). Or why not just mention Newark again? Or the man who allegedly shot the cop in Kenosha?

Classic. The thrust of the whole article is the backlash since the Newark killings. There is hardly a need to mention it again.

No statistics for Wisconsin? Well, just throw out one horrible example where an illegal immigrant is charged with a murder, she says. That's exactly how she operates.

To some degree, that's what the article is all about. McBride is already on record calling for the deportation of all 12 million illegal aliens now in the country. McBride and hubby/demagogue Paul Bucher would like to frighten people into believing there is a crime wave caused by illegal immigrants.

All they are missing is the proof.

AFTERTHOUGHT: Did I forget to mention she teaches college journalism?

Wait, She Can't Do That, Can She?

McBride again shows her journalistic integrity with a post deriding Hillary Clinton, a presidential candidate, for answering a question about terrorism as she promotes her candidacy. McBride goes starts with:

Her first thoughts about another terrorist attack occurring involve how it could help her politically.

.

She then goes on to state that the Democrats are at a disadvantage, in her opinion, in the event of a future terrorist attack, because the Republicans are the deciders and the do-gooders, while the Democrats are just a bunch of obstructionists.

.

Several issues could be brought up about this posting of McBride's. One could be trivial and point out that McBride's link leads to the Blogger sign in page, as opposed to a real news story like this.

.

Or one could discuss how McBride thinks that infringements of rights, isolationism, violations of the Geneva convention and human rights, and an illegal war which caused a recruiting boom and training camp for terrorists is actually a good thing. This could be followed up with McBride's disdain for diplomacy and statesmanship.

.

But the true McBrideian part of the post is that she lambastes Clinton for answering a question about terrorism, but puts on her cheerleader uniform and picks up her pom poms for Mr. 9/11, Newt, and her real life version of Jack Bauer (who not only capitalized on terrorism politically, but also monetarily).

Campaign Deja Vu

McBride remarks that she laughed when she saw a headline saying "Clinton vows to improve healthcare". She then asks "Didn't she have her chance, circa 1993?"

We at Whallah can appreciate where she is coming from. We are still laughing from from this headline, thinking didn't Paul have his chance at a state seat, circa 2006?

And of course, Whallah would also like to remind the gentle reader of Rule #83: Paul Bucher has never been a judge, not even for one day

Is there a lawyer in the house?

Legal scholar Jessica McBride asks:

Should the states get to decide if a man can legally murder his wife or a woman her husband?

Illusory Tenant answers:

That is precisely what the States get to decide, always has been, and as a matter of fact, it wasn't all that long ago that adultery was a successful affirmative defense against a murder charge.

In which case there might not be the ex-Mrs. Bucher, but the widow Bucher.

More from Illusory Tenant here.

Calling a bluff by Texas Hold 'Em

This may seem a little inside baseball, but we think it's important to hold bloggers accountable for what they write, and to point it out when they are unwilling to acknowledge the truth. (And there's something about being called a liar by someone who's lying that just kind of sticks in our craw.)

Which brings us to the blogger known as Texas Hold 'Em. For economy, we'll just call him Tex.

We noted last week that Tex seemed confused about two Wisconsin "right to life" groups, and who said and did what to whom when.

Tex defends Pro-Life Wisconsin, a fringe group that believes women should be allowed to die rather than have life-saving abortions, among other tenets.

Recently, Paul Hill Days, a celebration and reenactment of the murder of an abortion provider, took place in Milwaukee. Among those present in the same place and at the same time as the event was the director of Pro-Life Wisconsin. The organization's van, clearly identified, was parked in a prominent location as well. Here's a report from someone who attended.

When we pointed out the discrepancy, between his claims and what had actually happened, Tex commented:

Read NARAL’s own release. The Feminazis said flat-out that Pro-Life Wisconsin also condemned the rally. Why would NARAL say that if PLW didn’t condemn it?

We read NARAL'S release, as he suggested. Despite his claim, it never mentioned Pro-Life Wisconsin.

So we left a comment on Tex's blog last week, but it has been "awaiting moderation" ever since. In other words, he is not going to allow it to be posted.

That's unfortunate, since the comment simply printed the press release from NARAL, the pro-choice group Tex loves to call Femi-Nazis. The release, which he had been citing as proof that Pro-Life Wisconsin had condemned the Paul Hill event, shows that his claim is clearly untrue. You can read it here. It actually condemns Pro-Life Wisconsin director's participation and calls on the group's endorsed candidates to disavow the group and return contributions.

Instead of posting that, he linked to an irrelevant release from the other "pro-life" group, Wisconsin Right to Life, which also says nothing about Pro-Life Wisconsin.

We started our exchange with Tex by saying he clearly was confused. But it looks like it's more than a simple misunderstanding. He now knows he was wrong, is unwilling to admit it, and continues to misrepresent Pro-Life Wisconsin's position.

We call, Tex. Up to you.

A review you won't hear on talk radio

"The Council Bluffs Community School District superintendent also characterized the book by Wisconsin radio and TV talk-show host Charles Sykes as an offensive publication that lacks wit and insight."

More here.

Deport all 12 million!

Jessica McBride's obsession with illegal immigration, and her attempts to frighten people by linking immigrants to crime, has put her in the vanguard of immigrant bashers.

But this appears to represent a new, even harder line.

Caught up in a back and forth over the "50+ Things You Won't Learn From Talk Radio," she says:

Not a single illegal immigrant criminal should remain in this country.

Apparently, extremism in the attack on immigrants is no vice. McBride is clearly on the lunatic fringe on this issue.

Forunately, the American public is more rational, as an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in June illustrated. It asked:

"Regardless of how you feel about it personally, do you think that deporting all illegal immigrants who are currently in the United States back to their native countries is a realistic and achievable goal, or not?"

The response was: 13% is achievable, 85% is not achievable, 2% unsure.

UPDATE: James Harris, the newest dim bulb in the conservative talk radio galaxy, goes McBride one better. He wants to deport a US citizen, born in this country.

She Doesn't Teach Logic Either

Most people would agree that a basic logic example would be if a=b and a=c, then b=c. But not in McBride's world, where it would be more like if a=b and a=c, then x=z.

In another response to the 50+ Things, McBride changes the rules to fit her need to try to construe that Bill Clinton's popularity was because he was such a rabid conservative. The obvious question would be, "If extreme conservatism is so popular, why is she off the air?"

UPDATE: Further and more profound dissertations have been done by both Other Side and Illusory Tenant

McBride Strikes Back

McBride, not known for her originality, has responded to Tom McMahon's response to the "50+ Things You Won't Hear On Talk Radio". At first glance, one would have thought she was coming to the defense of her once former friend and mentor, Charlie Sykes. But upon further reading, it turns out to be, at best, a pedestrian and sophomoric attempt to get back at all those darn lefty blogs that would point out the errors of her thinking and/or writing. However, instead of repudiating "50+ Things", she ends up validating them.

In the interest of time and space, as well as the reader's sanity, only a few of the more special ones will be highlighted here. Those with strong enough constitution and/or masochistic tendencies, are welcome to go to the site itself.

The original rule will be in regular type, McBride's response will be in red (I couldn't resist the scarlet letter analogy) and Whallah's response to the response will be italicized.

7) The rich get richer and the poor get poorer; it's the Republican way.

So you admit that the economy is thriving?

The poor are supposed to get poorer and they don't deserve health care either.

14) I'm sorry.

Liberals only say they're sorry when they are gunning for cheap political gain by repudiating their earlier Iraq votes.

See, she can't say it either.

15) I was wrong.

Ditto.

Ditto.

18) George Bush made a mistake.

And supports amnesty for illegal aliens.And didn’t send enough troops to Iraq to secure the peace.But he’s pretty darn good at picking Supreme Court justices (the second time around).

See #14 and 15.

21There were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq.

Too bad so many leading Democrats misled the country into believing there would be WMD found in Iraq.

It's the Democrats fault that Bush told them incorrect information? See #14 and 15.

28) Bill Clinton was incredibly popular.

So incredibly popular he was impeached.

Bill Clinton was incredibly popular, the Republicans had to try to impeach him, in order not to lose all power.

36When a poor person dies of hunger, it has not happened because God did not take care of him or her. It has happened because neither you nor I wanted to give that person what he or she needed. – Mother Teresa

Or because Angelina Jolie was overextended.

She makes fun of a nun, but it's supposed to be the liberals that have no respect for religion.

54The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. -- Bertrand Russell

The fools and fanatics are the terrorists, and the self-doubters are the Democrats.

See how she proves the original point.

64Be a class act. Class seems to be inextricably related to kindness, consideration, and a general recognition of human worth. -- Roy Beers.

Maybe you should preach to the choir, liberals. Read your own blogs. Listen to your leaders. Read your last rule.

Do as I say, not as I do.

71Blessed are the meek, for they shall possess the earth

Guess that rules out most liberal bloggers.

Guess that rules out most talk show hosts, and former talks show hosts.

83Paul Bucher has never been a judge, not even for one day.

Paul Bucher has never been a public defender.

No, but he is a trial lawyer.

This just in: US citizen accused of crime!

The Nutosphere continues its crusade to report every crime that involves an illegal immigrant.

They've been at it for a long time, starting with a Memorial Day shooting in 2006 that was commited by someone who turned out to be here legally. It was truly an Emily Litella moment, Jessica McBride blamed the police for providing the wrong info, but she had been claiming, long before any police announcement, that the shooter must have been an illegal.

McBride challenges the news media every time an illegal is found to have committed a crime or even been accused.

Her mentor, Charlie Sykes, does the same.

It seems less about crime than about looking for one more way to fuel anti-immigrant sentiment, using fear. Mr. McBride, Paul Bucher, tried to demagog the issue to victory in his failed race for attorney general, but he couldn't even sell the idea to the conservatives voting in the GOP primary. We are not experiencing an illegal immigrant crime wave. Our guess is that illegals commit fewer violent crimes than US citizens, although we haven't seen any statistics.

Here's a modest proposal:

If the right wing thinks it is so important, and so relevant, for the media to report it every time an illegal immigrant is accused of a crime, let's be fair about it. Crime stories could all include information that identifies the suspect as (a) an illegal immigrant, (b) an alien living here legally, or (c) a US citizen.

The media doesn't single out and identify suspects by race only when they are black. Why should it single out illegal immigrants, unless it is to promote another agenda?

Refighting the last war #2

Time for a reality check: McBride really believes a one-liner from 2002 will matter to anyone in a legislative race a year from now:

Alberta Darling ad #1.

You've probably heard:

Madison - In what could be the closest state Senate race in Wisconsin next year, state Rep. Sheldon Wasserman (D-Milwaukee) said today he will give up his
Assembly seat to challenge veteran Republican Sen. Alberta Darling of River Hills. All Politics Watch/Aug.8)

You may have forgotten this story (in fact, even though I wrote it, I forgot about it until someone tipped me off):

The hundreds of messages that have flooded the office of embattled Milwaukee County Executive F. Thomas Ament since the pension scandal erupted run the gamut from vicious hate mail to gushing support.

Among those messages was one from Wasserman to Ament, written in Ament's own hand. At the time, Wasserman was rumored to be running for county executive. The message read:

"1, He supports me. 2, Not running," from state Rep. Sheldon Wasserman (D-Milwaukee).

Ament as bogey man is even wearing a little thin as a Scott Walker schtick.

It'll never work for Darling. Let's hope she uses it -- and makes McBride her chief strategist.

Refighting the last war

McBride is still steamed that JB Van Hollen kicked her hubby's butt in the Republican primary for AG last fall.

And now, even worse, Van Hollen's getting some positive stories from the "liberal media" -- of which she is a former active member. (It makes you wonder. Did she see how liberal the media were when she was a reporter? Did she ever complain about it? Or did her recent conversion to conservatism -- some say she's a conservative by marriage -- open her eyes?)

She's clearly unhappy about Van Hollen's good fortune, offering this backhanded compliment to JBVH's media honeymoon:

Attorney General Van Hollen has some good PR people working for him. The backlog in the crime lab (his signature issue) has actually increased since 2006 (through July 31st of this year), and his people turn it into a series of positive headlines around the state. Finally, the liberal media have found a Republican they won't spin everything negative on. Wonders never cease. The Democrats would be ill-advised to underestimate Van Hollen as a potential gubernatorial challenger in 2010. The linked story is a classic political PR example of how to take a potential negative and turn it into a positive.

UPDATE: McBride may be pleased to learn than JBVH is under fire for his association with Pro-Life Wisconsin, the extremists who recently celebrated with a re-enactment of the murder of an abortion provider.

UPDATE 2: Even her fellow wingers, like Little Miss Sunshine, see what she's up to:

I'm afraid Mrs. Bucher loses a little credibility when she blogs so bitterly about the Attorney General who defeated her husband in a primary race. I guess old grudges die hard.

UPDATE 3: Mr. Hold 'Em of Texas is confused about who said what to whom when. But if you want to see for yourself what NARAL did and didn't say, here is the press release.

Calling the McBride sexism police

Does our friend Jessica -- hear her roar! -- only see sexism when she's criticized by someone of the male persuasion (espcially liberal males)?

Let's see if her friend at Texas Hold 'Em rates a scolding for his What every man wants for Christmas post.

Or will these be one of those "Omigod, I am laughing so hard I could die" moments?

You go, girl!

Lest there be any remaining question about whether Jessica McBride can claim the mantle of "journalist," this piece of cheerleading should settle it once and for all:

Go Rudy

I know there are questions over Rudy's approach toward illegal immigration in the past. But this story below is exactly why I like Rudy. I started out instinctually supporting Rudy. I then briefly gravitated toward Fred Thompson. But he hasn't gotten in, and that speaks to a certain indecision. I confess to liking Duncan Hunter. I remain undecided, but gravitating back toward Rudy:

AIKEN, S.C. (AP) -- Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani vowed Tuesday to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States by closely tracking visitors to the country and beefing up border security.

Go Rudy???

Just a few months ago, her live blogging of a GOP presidential debate included this insight:

McCain trashes Harry Reid. GO MCCAIN

Illusory Tenant described it thusly at the time:

The rest of her "liveblogging" reads like entries in a 14-year-old girl's diary, and is just about as embarrassing to read: "McCain trashes Harry Reid. GO MCCAIN."

And she complains when some black journalists and students applaud two Democratic presidential candidates who came to speak to them in person?

Go Jessica!