This is one of the most offensive things I’ve read:
I get the impression that Luke Hellier doesn’t know me and isn’t a regular reader of The Deets. Perhaps I’m wrong about this, but if I was to describe the type of stuff I blog about, I think a description of fact based with commentary would be fairly accurate. I don’t make stuff up so I can write about it. Reality has plenty of interesting stories, as far as I’m concerned.
Looking back at this weekend’s posts where Luke Hellier was mentioned, here’s what I see:
In “Luke Hellier: Minnesota Democrats Exposed Exposed” I explained that Luke Hellier used truncated crime data to support his misguided narrative regarding the state of crime in the City of Minneapolis during RT Rybak’s tenure. Even though we’re weeks away from the end of 2009, Hellier chose to use data from 2008 because crime in 2009 crime stats to not support his anti-Rybak argument. This was outed and not contested.
In “Is Luke Hellier Lying or Stupid” I documented that Luke Hellier claimed that I said something I did not say and provided proof that Luke was making stuff up (lying). I also explained that Luke Hellier was cherry picking statistics to support his misguided arguments, which is rather immature of him.
In “2008 vs 2009 Crime in Minneapolis” I documented that there is little to no chance that aggravated assault crimes will be up in Minneapolis year over year for 2009 (December assaults would have to double their historical average).
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think I’m 3 for 3 on backing up my arguments with evidence.
At this point, I think Luke Hellier should be thinking about whether he’s cut out for the role he currently holds at Minnesota Democrats Exposed. As I mentioned before: I think there is a role for opposition websites like Minnesota Democrats Exposed, but their influence relies entirely on the intelligence, authority, and influence of the site’s author(s), which is where MDE has slipped considerably. Luke Hellier’s credibility is seriously in question based on his inability to rely upon facts to support his anti-Rybak arguments.