At
least five right-wing gasbags spew their venom over the metro
Milwaukee radio airwaves. With so many hours of dead air to fill, it
is no wonder that many Milwaukee-area progressives have been
singled-out on these shows. Last week, I wrote about one of my own
experiences in being personally attacked on right-wing radio. Today,
I would like to talk about a second.
For
four years, I wrote a political blog in the Germantown NOW on-line
newspaper. During the legislature's 2015 "emergency" rush
to jam-through Right-to-Freeload, I published a series of
informational blogs on the topic. In one of those articles, titled
"Better Rethink This", I compared the then-24 states
with Right-to-Freeload (RTF) laws to the 26 states where workers pay their fair share for their union contract negotiations.
Using highly reliable data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the US Census Bureau, I compared the two groups of states with respect to poverty rates, average pay, insurance coverage, and workplace safety. By any of these quality-of-life measures, workers in non-RTF states were found to be much better off than those subjected to union-busting RTF regulations.
Limbaugh wannabe and self-proclaimed World's Expert, Jay Weber, took exception to my fact-based arguments. He devoted an hour of air time to mischaracterizing my article. I welcome an adult and rational discussion on state policies as important as RTF. However, all we got from Weber were personal attacks, name-calling, and aspersion. Weber called those who disagree with his virulently anti-union opinions "ignorant" and "low-information". He then launched into an emotional tirade attacking me.
Actual numbers and statistics fail Weber, so he resorted to calling me a liar in as many ways as his Thesaurus would permit. At various points in his rant, he called these comparisons: "invented facts", "fake facts" (his favorite), "fake arguments", "false arguments", "a huge lie", "false statistics", "bunch of crap", "nonsense", "misleading", "misdirection", "invented narratives", "terribly dishonest", "bogus", an "intentional lie", and a "charade of an argument". Weber's attempt to dismiss the facts reminded me of a third grader's "Huh-uh !" playground argument.
Weber's unnerved bluster was an attempt to cover his own lack of evidence for his position. While my article clearly linked to the data sources, he gave no such sources for his anti-worker opinions. During most of his rant, Weber was just content to hold-forth on the "proven success" of RTF and "the mountain of evidence" that it works. I guess that we must take his word for it, because after all, he is The Expert on such matters.
Weber revels in being anti-intellectual and that theme saturates his ramblings. He said that I had a "condescending" tone (meaning I use big words). He said that I believe that readers are "cows and I came here to enlighten you". (I assume that my readers are intelligent and write to that intelligence). In a sneering voice, he prefaced part of my article, saying "Mr. Scientist is going to walk us through this because we are idiots."(I make no apologies for my scientific training and career).
And if ad absurdum repetition of his "Huh-uh !" argument was not enough to sway his listeners, Weber called me names that I haven't heard since elementary school. In addition to repeatedly calling me a liar for reporting factual data, Weber brought the discussion to an even more juvenile level by calling me a "clown" and a "clown-weasel" (whatever that is).
In an especially emotional outburst which destroyed any pretense of objectivity, Weber called me "an "indoctrinated "lib" who either realizes what he is doing or he is a complete pawn and patsy of the activist left who has completely swallowed their deceptive tripe."
Unlike most people who are victims of Weber's on-air tantrums, I had the ability to respond. I wrote a follow-up called, "Mr. Weber Loses the Argument". Rather than respond to this article with an adult discussion of any facts, Weber grew even more shrill and apoplectic. He grossly mischaracterized my writing. He questioned the number of readers of my blog. He was worked into such a snit that he refused to even mention my name. How dare I question the great and all-knowing Jay Weber?
If we plan to impose such radical policy changes on Wisconsin as Right-to-Freeload, we must have adult conversations on the merits. We must spend the time for rational public debate. On-air rants like Weber's childish outbursts add nothing constructive to the discussion.
I don't tell these tales of my own experiences with hate-radio because they are that important on their own. I tell them because my stories are all too common in the Milwaukee metro area. Too often, progressive thoughts and ideas are shouted down by the radio squawkers of the right. Too often, these school-yard bullies are not called-out for their anti-worker, anti-woman, anti-education, and often racist views. That must change.
Using highly reliable data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the US Census Bureau, I compared the two groups of states with respect to poverty rates, average pay, insurance coverage, and workplace safety. By any of these quality-of-life measures, workers in non-RTF states were found to be much better off than those subjected to union-busting RTF regulations.
Limbaugh wannabe and self-proclaimed World's Expert, Jay Weber, took exception to my fact-based arguments. He devoted an hour of air time to mischaracterizing my article. I welcome an adult and rational discussion on state policies as important as RTF. However, all we got from Weber were personal attacks, name-calling, and aspersion. Weber called those who disagree with his virulently anti-union opinions "ignorant" and "low-information". He then launched into an emotional tirade attacking me.
Actual numbers and statistics fail Weber, so he resorted to calling me a liar in as many ways as his Thesaurus would permit. At various points in his rant, he called these comparisons: "invented facts", "fake facts" (his favorite), "fake arguments", "false arguments", "a huge lie", "false statistics", "bunch of crap", "nonsense", "misleading", "misdirection", "invented narratives", "terribly dishonest", "bogus", an "intentional lie", and a "charade of an argument". Weber's attempt to dismiss the facts reminded me of a third grader's "Huh-uh !" playground argument.
Weber's unnerved bluster was an attempt to cover his own lack of evidence for his position. While my article clearly linked to the data sources, he gave no such sources for his anti-worker opinions. During most of his rant, Weber was just content to hold-forth on the "proven success" of RTF and "the mountain of evidence" that it works. I guess that we must take his word for it, because after all, he is The Expert on such matters.
Weber revels in being anti-intellectual and that theme saturates his ramblings. He said that I had a "condescending" tone (meaning I use big words). He said that I believe that readers are "cows and I came here to enlighten you". (I assume that my readers are intelligent and write to that intelligence). In a sneering voice, he prefaced part of my article, saying "Mr. Scientist is going to walk us through this because we are idiots."(I make no apologies for my scientific training and career).
And if ad absurdum repetition of his "Huh-uh !" argument was not enough to sway his listeners, Weber called me names that I haven't heard since elementary school. In addition to repeatedly calling me a liar for reporting factual data, Weber brought the discussion to an even more juvenile level by calling me a "clown" and a "clown-weasel" (whatever that is).
In an especially emotional outburst which destroyed any pretense of objectivity, Weber called me "an "indoctrinated "lib" who either realizes what he is doing or he is a complete pawn and patsy of the activist left who has completely swallowed their deceptive tripe."
Unlike most people who are victims of Weber's on-air tantrums, I had the ability to respond. I wrote a follow-up called, "Mr. Weber Loses the Argument". Rather than respond to this article with an adult discussion of any facts, Weber grew even more shrill and apoplectic. He grossly mischaracterized my writing. He questioned the number of readers of my blog. He was worked into such a snit that he refused to even mention my name. How dare I question the great and all-knowing Jay Weber?
If we plan to impose such radical policy changes on Wisconsin as Right-to-Freeload, we must have adult conversations on the merits. We must spend the time for rational public debate. On-air rants like Weber's childish outbursts add nothing constructive to the discussion.
I don't tell these tales of my own experiences with hate-radio because they are that important on their own. I tell them because my stories are all too common in the Milwaukee metro area. Too often, progressive thoughts and ideas are shouted down by the radio squawkers of the right. Too often, these school-yard bullies are not called-out for their anti-worker, anti-woman, anti-education, and often racist views. That must change.
No comments:
Post a Comment