There is no real point in getting upset over Democratic Party official Graeme Zielinski's comparison of Scott Walker to Jeffrey Dahmer.
Zielinski steadfastly refuses to behave like someone who ought to be
taken seriously and so I don't. (In fairness to him, he did apologize
which is, I suppose, a baby step toward reform.)
What I find intriguing is why the Democratic Party continues to put
this guy front and center. His latest bout of political Tourette's was
hardly the first and may not even have been the worst.
I would find it easier to believe that Zielinski is a creation of
the Koch Brothers - put forward to make the Democrats look bad - than to
think that this is the guy who rational people (and, no, I don't think
that rationality is limited to one side of the aisle) would want as a
spokesperson. If he didn't exist, I would think that the Republicans
would have to invent him.
But I may be wrong. While he may have gone too far this time, he has
remained a spokesperson after saying some pretty outrageous things. I
have to assume that this is at least a calculated - if not necessarily
smart - decision.
That may say something about the state of
our politics. It may be that hate arouses the base and that someone
willing to spew it serves a purpose. My side has some flamers as well
although I can't think of one who has remained in an official capacity
after repeated bouts of public rabies.
Pity that.
Cross posted at Purple Wisconsin.
7 comments:
It is interesting that the J-S gives this guy a lot of attention on other topics despite his frequent toxic comments. Does that say something more about the journalist than the communication directors ?
"My side has some flamers as well although I can't think of one who has remained in an official capacity after repeated bouts of public rabies."
Of course not, professor. From your perspective, the actions of Zaelinski are NOT as vile and prolific say, for example, as Glenn Grothman.
The (D)'s and the (R)'s have their attack dogs. They serve their purpose. Partisans from either side can claim "foul" and feign outrage. But, deep down, you know they are useful and are willing to turn the other way on occasion.
Professor, if you were truly disgusted by the sad state of politics in our state and country, you would also be calling out your kind whenever they engaged in egregious behavior like Zaelinski. Except, that would require you to run counter to your tribal instincts.
Are you willing to alienate your supporters? To take on the Sykes of the world? No. So please spare us all the fake concern.
The journal-sentinel is at it again today with Patrick Marley's goofy story on Roggensack's list of endorsements. Marley rushes like a loyal lemming to the talking points of her opposition. Yet, he ignores that Fallone has taken money from a felon who served time in federal prison.
Also in the JS, marley is pushing his book on the act 10 "protests" that is sure to be slanted against Walker.
-----To take on the Sykes of the world? No. So please spare us all the fake concern. ----
Please produce links to any Charlie Sykes statement in the same ballpark of offense as comparing Walker to Dahmer.
----marley is pushing his book on the act 10 "protests" that is sure to be slanted against Walker. -----
Ooohh Oooohhh, I can't wait for that one. When is it excreted?
"My evidence? Absolutely none"--Charlie Sykes.
Enough said, Unknown.
Post a Comment