April 18, 2011

For it was I, Sykes, who won the Supreme Court

At least that's what the medium wave howler is claiming here.*

Sad, in a way.
So you could argue that Kloppenburg lost the election not in Waukesha, but in Milwaukee County, which failed to deliver her the votes she needed. — JRN marquee talent Charlie Sykes
I guess you could, as that's what I've been saying since February 16.

What is sad, though, is Sykes's mincing triumphalism, because what he doesn't tell you is that if his special theory has validity, then the dissembling shouter managed to impede Justice Prosser's progress in almost every single one of the Wisconsin counties he mentions, by:
Milwaukee: 11 points
Racine: 6 points
Waukesha: 8 points
Washington: 5 points
Ozaukee: 9 points
Dodge: 11 points
Fond Du Lac: 11 points
Jefferson: 10 points
Walworth: 4 points
That's how much Prosser conceded, between the general election on April 5 and the primary election on February 15, which is when Sykes commenced his 50K-watt campaign of ludicrous propagandas.

The only place which Charlie Sykes mentions that Justice Prosser didn't lose major ground during his springtime political campaign was Sheboygan County, where the politically conservative jurisprude held 'er to 63%. Journal Communications, Inc. counts ShebCo. as being within its "listening area," but maybe not so much after all.

And it's noteworthy that Sykes doesn't mention Kenosha County, equally within Sykes's 620 kHz calls-to-prayer, where Kloppenburg gained so many points (nine), she managed to wrest Prosser's victory in the primary clean from his learned hands (he went from 56% to 47%). Apparently that's a mite too inconvenient for Charlie Sykes's theory which, as noted above, is a "special" and not "general" theory.

"Special," as in, just like the theory's fabricator. Besides, ShebCo. has (mercifully) a pantload of alternatives to Sykes, as it's a wee bit closer to the considerable Green Bay market than it is to Milwaukee.

Sykes's ultimately self-defeating sense of false pride (Jeez, doesn't anybody around here read the Book of Proverbs anymore?) is part of the narrative that insists Scott Walker is super-beloved and Prosser's unimpressive 0.488603046756558% margin of victory is a resounding validation of all things conservative, Republican, and possibly even Ayn Randian (except for that bit about abortion. Oh, and Proverbs).

Charlie Sykes's right-hand wing-nut** media compadre and widely respected academic heavyweight Richard Esenberg has — naturally — taken to its weak peddling as well, albeit even less coherently. Prof. "Shark" dismisses a certain argument as "not being helpful" in spite of neither being able to bring himself to link to the argument's source nor even come close to explaining why exactly it is "not helpful."

I mean, obviously, it's not helpful to him. We knew that ages ago.

* Although the poor sod can't even manage to get his raw numbers correct. AAG JoAnne Kloppenburg won 8296 votes in Ozaukee County, not 8246 (and Charlie Sykes actually lives in Ozaukee County).

** Or is it right-wing hand-nut.

P.S. Charlie Sykes didn't win a Pulitzer Prize again today.

eta: Jay Bullock on Sykes's baseless self-aggrandizement habit.


Jay Bullock said...

FYI, Sykes was doing the same thing--and was wrong in the same way--in 2006.

illusory tenant said...

Thanks. Why is Sykes taken seriously by anyone? I'm mystified.

Cindy K. said...

Well here's one topic on which we agree completely.