Social justice warrior issues warning to Blaska:
“Someone … should ask him not to ‘put his life on the line’ by running for school board. [that] his life is not worth putting in jeopardy.”
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores is a member of the anti-cop Community Response Team that has been hounding Police Chief Mike Koval for the last five years. Amelia Royko Maurer is its leader. Kilfoy-Flores joined with Sharon Irwin in hauling the chief before the Police & Fire Commission. (The city wound up paying Koval’s legal bills.) CRT reflexively opposes additional police officers, the MidTown police station, and all things cop. Kilfoy-Flores and CRT mainstay Nino Rodriguez are regulars supporting Freedom Inc.’s disruption of Madison school board meetings.
Blaska’s Bottom Line: Learn to spell, Shadayra. It’s Blaska.
B-L-A-S-K-A for Safer Schools.
P.O. Box 44663
Madison WI 53744-4663
Blaska Policy Werkes 
62 responses to “This is what I’m up against, folks”
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores words should be taken as a threat and calling the throngs of idiots to action and now she is trying to hide her illegal threats behind the classic it was just a joke or that’s not what I meant rationalizations. Intelligent people that use their cognisant abilities to actually comprehend the written word aren’t a stupid as Shadayra must think, I call bull shit on Shadayra’s claims that she didn’t threaten David Blaska.
I don’t care one bit what anyone says, anything that appears to be a threat in any way shape or form should always be taken 100% seriously, and you can quote me on that. If someone had written the same thing about Shadayra she should justifiably take it a threatening.
It’s my personal opinion that Shadayra doesn’t know what the golden rule is or she doesn’t think it applies to her, which is of course what any person that allows the nonsense of the social justice warrior cult to infect their brain would think.
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores wrote, “In addition to a formal complaint, you can and will be sued for defaming MY name.”
Only ignorant fools issue idle threats like that one.
Shadayra,
A word of advice, take it or leave it. It’s not defamation to literally quote someone word-for-word and render your personal opinion about what was quoted. You literally started this whole thing with your literal threats and you were ignorant enough to put them in writing. If you’re actually stupid enough to file a defamation lawsuit then you better find yourself a profiteering unethical lawyer trying to profit on an unwinnable defamation case because no reputable lawyer would take your case and you don’t appear to be qualified to act as your own attorney, or are you one of those people that claim to be a lawyer in all but degree. I hope you and/or your idiotic supporters have have really deep pockets because you are going to have to dig, dig, dig.
Shadayra the right thing for you to do is to is stop rationalizing your threats and make a very public apology to David Blaska. How about you be a real adult, humble yourself, and apologize to David Blaska on The All-New Mitch Henck Show and at the same time you can apologize to both Mitch and David for calling them pathetic and saying they are lying. This would go a long way to heal the damage that you yourself created.
LikeLike
Shadayra here is relevant information about how to properly apologize.
Shadayra,
Your apology goal should be #1 but I’d place bets and give odds that an apology from you about this fiasco that you started wouldn’t rise above #7.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Araceli Lopez Esparza posted on Facebook:
“and I’m not going to stand by and watch My friend Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores be bullied by David Blaska A political blogger, WHOSE FRIENDS MADE THREATS TO HER, after his post.”
(caps mine)
Not seeing any threats on this site.
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores posted on The All-New Mitch Henck show:
“I NEVER threatened David Blaska and I made it clear that I was quoting HIM.”
Nope, not clear at all, that’s why everyone here attributed the quote to you.
You never mentioned the source of the quote.
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores wrote:
“Maybe his hero, Paula Fitzgerald, will convince him that his life is not worth putting in jeopardy.”
Your words Shadayra. Again, not entirely clear. Reads like you are making a threat?
Shadayra/Araceli,
You could have posted on this thread to clarify instead of addressing indirectly elsewhere.
Why did you choose not to?
Obviously you are monitoring Dave’s blogsite.
“You sir can be added to my formal police report for being reckless and willfully causing me to be harassed by LYING.”
How are you being harassed and by whom Shadayra? Please explain.
LikeLike
Shady contends she is quoting from a private conversation she thinks she overheard. I never said that publicly during my public comment.
LikeLike
Appreciate the clarification DB.
Shadayra’s hearsay is presented as fact.
The original Flores comment contains the same threat twice made even if the words in quotes are (supposedly) yours.
LikeLike
Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores posted on The All-New Mitch Henck Show:
“I NEVER threatened David Blaska and I made it clear that I was quoting HIM.”
Squire; you posted an excerpt from a social media comment by Shadayra that initiated this hullabaloo. Is there anywhere else she publicly indicates who authored the quoted words, “put his life on the line”?
LikeLike
@Batman;
The electrifying Ms. Kilfoy-Flores: “I NEVER threatened David Blaska and I made it clear that I was quoting HIM.”
Made clear? Where? To whom? Anyone here? Bueller…?
Cluelessness of this magnitude should hurt…BAD!
Without consequence, there’s no lesson learned, and the provider ends up…um…providing more proof of the painfully obvious.
The Gotch
LikeLike
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
LikeLike
AnonyBob wrote, “Richard chides you, Batty and Gootch for using fake names, and not very sophisticated names at that, while you talk about adult discussion. “Get ‘em from TV?” That’s not ad hominem, that’s just obvious.” and Richard did that without address a word about the comments that others wrote, so he attacks the person and not the argument – that is the very definition of an ad hominem AnonyBob.
It seems that attack the messenger ad hominems is about the only things you and Richard have for “arguments” as usual, it’s unethical.
LikeLike
AnonyBob wrote, “So how is that different than a favorite one-word comment of yours?”
It’s not different AnonyBob.
The real factual difference between you two and me is that you two rarely, and I really mean extremely rarely, have any arguments that are not 100% attack the messenger ad hominems or completely unrelated deflections and you ignore what you are comment/replying to and you’re both well aware of that fact, thus the perception is that you are trolling for effect. Most of the time I won’t even say much about an ad hominem if an actual substantive argument is presented at the same time, which you have done once in a blue moon and sometimes I actually entertain your argument.
Have a happy new year AnonyBob.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Zoltar speaks!;
@AnonyBob &@richard lesiak just got(ch) Gotch Spanked
Priceless!!!
The Gotch
LikeLike
“It’s not different…”
Ah, then you’re just talking difference of degree of the ad hominems we almost all use here. I’d entertain your criticism if you also ever challenged any of your comrades at arms, especially those who specialize in over-wrought and “creatively” spelled (I’m being polite, here) personal attacks.
Consider this, Z: it’s a right wing blog with a conservative audience. The few of us here from the left consider it our responsibility to challenge all of your misguided notions, while y’all defend them. Sometimes those challenges are blunt and short, sometimes they’re more detailed. The detailed ones are rarely given rational consideration and are usually just met with personal insults. Even you had to learn to tone down your language. It seems to be what’s tolerated here. You think Dave is looking for Socratic discussion? His elbows are plenty sharp, too.
Happy New Year to you, too.
LikeLike
@AnonyBob;
“over-wrought and ‘creatively’ spelled”
Perception ain’t yer strongsuit, so perhaps you hadn’t noticed that youse are the only one that has a problem with my particular…um…style, or wastes bandwidth on it.
The “creative” mispelling (sic) is intentional. It might behoove youse to concentrate yer efforts on someone FAR more needful; the one regular commenter that can’t figure out the difference between your and you’re or that eluded and alluded are two completely different words with two completely different meanings.
But like Archie Bunker inexplicably called an epically inane Stretch Cunningham the King of Comedy, youse deem that commenter’s language skills as positively Churchillian, for no other reason than he ONLY makes pre-approved selections from the Lefty World View Cafeteria.
Youse know, just like youse!
The ONLY thing The Gotch would need to do to secure your monumentally hypocritical support would be to follow suit. There’s a word for that, and it’s something Lefty has in no short supply!
Notwithstanding, Happy New Year…to all!
The Gotch
LikeLike
AnonyBob wrote, “The few of us here from the left consider it our responsibility to challenge all of your misguided notions”
That’s a lie. That is NOT what you do, people like you and Richard attack the messengers endlessly without challenging arguments at all.
AnonyBob wrote, “The detailed ones are rarely given rational consideration and are usually just met with personal insults.”
Hogwash. Your thoughtful comments that have addressed topics have been addressed by others including me. You might consider writing real arguments instead of your usual progressive cant aka frontier gibberish.
LikeLike
AnonyBob wrote, “Ah, then you’re just talking difference of degree of the ad hominems we almost all use here.”
No Stupid!
Read again!
It is completely clear that I was talking about presenting substantive arguments along with your attack the messenger ad hominems which you and Richard rarely do, that’s what make is 100% ad hominems.
I’ve presented the definition for ad hominem numerous times and you appear to be acting obtuse.
LikeLike
I wish Shadayra Kilfoy-Flores had the intellectual fortitude to leave her echo chamber and come here to chat about this, but I’m pretty sure that she’s a rhetorical coward outside her echo chamber.
LikeLike