I went down to the Dunn Brothers at Lake and Bryant this morning, and was gratified to meet some people; Amendment X from Savage Republican, regular commenter BillH, a photographer whose name eludes me, and Mark, a charter member of “Old Friends of Mitch going back about thirty years. Fortified with Dunn’s finest, we walked over to Lake and Lyndale, by the Army Recruiting station (to the relief of the capo di tutti barristi, who clearly was not in favor of completing the mission.

There, we met Diamond Dog from Freedom Dogs and American flag, and Doug (missed the last name), who brought signs. Finally, walking up Lake Street from the other side of the protest, of all people, James Lileks – bearing video and still cameras and the pithiest counterchants in the business.

We stood in front of Greek To Me, across the street from the main body of the protest.

Most of the media must have been concentrated up at Loring Park, where the protest was supposed to end; all we had at Lake and Lyndale was a single cameraman from Channel 5 who, to Stanley Hubbard’s credit, crossed the street to film and talk with us.

After half an hour of highly-scripted chanting (a nice girl walked around at the beginning of the gathering, handing out a photocopied sheet of “Antiwar Chants by MN Socialist Alternative).

A cute redhead with a pierced nose and a carpenters apron festooned with fascist flair walked through the crowd selling buttons. Among them were a bunch of Che Guevara buttons.

“One dollar”, she said, perkily.

“You do know that Guevara was a mass murderer, don’t you? He ordered the execution of children?”

She grinned, looking a little dazed, and walked away to more fertile sales ground.

After half an hour or so, the “protesters” began walking down Lake Street toward Hennepin. After a block or two, their organizers – equipped with bullhorns – began urging the crowd to move out onto the westbound lane of Lake Street, causing a big, carbon-guzzling traffic jam behind them.

We counterprotesters, being ecologically conscious, stuck to the sidewalk.

The entire mob of them walked through Calhoun Square, chanting at the top of their lungs (Lileks and I followed them), and then came out the Hennepin side, heading north . The counterprotest met them at the corner, and as the bullhorns bellowed “Who is the terrorist?” we answered “Ahmadinejad!” over their feeble “Bush Is The Terrorist”.

More observations as they return to me…

Michelle Malkin has the blogburst coverage of yesterday’s Gathering of Eagles counterdemonstration Vietnam Vet’s memorial – which, according to many observers, matched the well-funded ANSWER-sponsored protests against the war:

A pure, grass-roots effort, the Gathering of Eagles’ volunteers matched the massive Soros-funded anti-war machine sign for sign, chant for chant, and marcher for marcher. The contrast was most stark right before the entrance to the Memorial Bridge, where Eagles gathered with a field of American flags–while anti-Bush, 9/11 conspiracy nuts wrapped themselves in a figurative blanket of yellow “Out of Iraq” placards. Several of the vets shouted, “Yellow! How appropriate!” in between spirited chants of “U.S.A! U.S.A!” While the classless Cindy Sheehan ranted profanely, the Eagles raised their voices in polite, but roaring disapproval and raised their American flags in answer to the ANSWER socialists’ Che banners and peace pennants.

Why did the Eagles come? One common refrain: Vietnam veterans, some fighting back tears, told us they came to show the kind of support for the troops that they did not receive when the surrender lobby marched on the Pentagon 40 years ago today.

Mission accomplished.

Read the whole thing.

The American cultural right – with families and day jobs and mortgages – doesn’t do a lot of picketing in the streets; we don’t have people who’ve been organizing the kind of stuff since the Johnson Administration.

So the turnout – in DC and here – is gratifying and encouraging.

We’ll be talking again with the Minnesota contingent at A Gathering of Eagles – the counter-protest in Washington tomorrow.

Here’s a little taste of what and who they’ll be facing:

 

Via Smash, thence via Michelle Malkin

Check out the GOE website.  Help out, even if you’re not on the bus to go to DC today.

Like I wish I were.

Paglia is right about Ann Coulter:

Coulter is a smart woman with formidable energy, and whether liberals like it or not, she is a high-profile feminist role model in her appetite for aggressive debate. But Coulter seems to be regressing rather than growing intellectually and sharpening her analytic skills. She evidently leaves no room in her life for study and reflection. I take books seriously (which is why I left the scene for five years to write “Break, Blow, Burn”) and thus hold against Coulter the part she has played in the debasement of that medium. Her books may rake in millions but won’t last because they are shoddily constructed. Coulter should be using her syndicated column for her topical opinions but her books for more considered contributions. “Godless,” for example, which intriguingly postulates the quasi-religiosity of contemporary liberalism, should have stimulated wide discussion but was so thrown together and full of holes that it was easy to dismiss and went unread outside her core audience.

Coulter sometimes reminds me of William Shatner.

No, bear with me here.

Shatner started his career as a serious actor.  Then came Star Trek.  And after Strek, he gave in to camp.

Coulter seems about the same; she can offer steak, but she seems to focus on sizzle.

Trite, embarassing sizzle.

The Elder beats down Brian Lambert:

For all the talk of “crushing of dissent,” “questioning of patriotism,” “building a theocracy,” “trashing the Constitution,” and “creating a climate of fear” in George Bush’s Amerika, it’s notable that at the end of the day, the only actual efforts to limit debate and free expression are coming from the Left. Imagine that.

Read the whole thing.  And respond by burning everything Brian Lambert has ever written, just to show him the real effect of what he’s proposing.

Just kidding about that last bit.

Minnesota Monitor – the group blog funded by a group that shares offices with George Soros’ attack-PR firm “Media Matters”, but whose operatives claim there’s no connection, nosirreebob, although no financials seem to be available – wrote about last week’s incident at Dordt College in Sioux Center Iowa (which I wrote about below):

Expect more events like these as Soulforce and the Equality Ride directly confront the institutions that produce this type of hatred. These people are doing the really hard work for the LGBTcommunity. If you have the means, please visit Soulforce and give a donation.

They left some parts out.  According to the Sioux City Journal, Dordt – which is a Christian school that explicitly prohibits gay relationships on campus (as is their First Amendment right; nobody forces anyone to attend Dordt), not only invited “Soulforce Q” – the gay activists from the Twin Cities who were the victims of last week’s vandalism – but would seem to have gone the extra mile in dealing with the vandalism:

The group contacted Dordt officials a few months ago to set up a panel discussion between its members and Dordt officials about the college’s GLBT policies, also having students accompany members around campus and facilitate conversations, said Norlan De Groot, Dordt director of public relations.

“We allowed their visit for two reasons: We considered this to be a learning opportunity for our students and an opportunity for Christian witness,” De Groot said…College officials were “saddened” to learn about the vandalism and apologized to the riders for its occurrence in Sioux Center, he said. Dordt maintenance workers cleaned the graffiti off of the vehicle.

“We don’t want to see that happen here,” De Groot said…The harassment and vandalism was reported to Sioux Center police, [college media relations guy Kyle] DeVries said. There was no indication anyone associated with Dordt was involved in the incidents.

(De Groot?  De Vries?  Dordt?  Ik sprek niet so veel Nederlands!  But I digress).

Go back and read the MNMon piece on the subject.  You could search for any of these facts – that Dordt did their best to both welcome the group and atone for the bad behavior of whomever committed the vandalism – but you’d search in vain.

Why?

When Minnesota Monitor came onto the scene, they said with a straight face (or as straight a face as Robin “Rew” Marty ever affects, at any rate) that because they took their organization’s “pledge”, they were a step or two above, better, and  more reliable than run-of-the-mill bloggers.

So let’s check out their “Code of Ethics” on behalf of reporter Andy Birkey’s story:

New Journalist Fellows should be honest, tireless, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information for the public… 

 I think it’s safe to say that Andy Birkey has tirelessly interpreted the events.

Never misrepresent events in an attempt to oversimplify or take events out of context…

Do you think the entire context of the story was correctly represented? 

Never limit their reporting to information that people want to hear…

If you assume that MNMon’s audience wants to hear “Small-town Christians (or maybe just Christians in general) are bigots!”, then I think that’s what MNMon has done. 

Seek to improve the public discourse by never stereotyping based on race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.

Given what was omitted from Birkey’s story, I think religious stereotyping is pretty much inevitable. 

 Use both official and unofficial sources to acknowledge and give voice to those without traditional power.

Birkey and MNMon seem to have ignored a couple of official sources.

  * Acknowledge the difference between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be understood as such.

Re-read Birkey’s last paragraph: “Expect more events like these as Soulforce and the Equality Ride directly confront the institutions that produce this type of hatred. ”  Did Birkey fulfill his duties under “the pledge?”

  New Journalist Fellows must maintain a sense of decency and integrity by treating sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.

By ignoring Dordt’s efforts to invite and welcome “Soulforce Q”, and their efforts to atone for whomever committed the vandalism, Birkey and MNMon violated this term.

  * [Pledgors should] Recognize the possible negative effects of their news stories, and remain humble in the pursuit of gathering and reporting information.

“Expect more events like these as Soulforce and the Equality Ride directly confront the institutions that produce this type of hatred. ” 

  Act Independently
New Journalist Fellows should inform the public of news stories and issues without letting improper relationships compromise their integrity.

One might be bidden to wonder if Andy Birkey’s obvious sympathies for Soulforce Q might not call his commitment to this part of “the pledge” into question?

Since one or the other of the usual suspects in my comment section will no doubt yap about this, I’ll head y’all off at the pass:   Yes.  To some extent, the fact that I am a Christian colors my approach to these kinds of stories.  Given the anti-Christian bigotry that suffuses so much of the lefty media, I tend to give Christians the benefit of the doubt.  And I think that, given the facts that Andy Birkey left out of his victim-mongering polemic, those doubts are amply justified.

  * [Pledgors should] Always be fair, but always favor truth over balance.

It’d seem Birkey achieved neither…

  * Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived, and disclose unavoidable conflicts. 

What is Birkey’s relationship with “Soulforce Q”?  While his sympathies are apparent in context (“Expect more events like these as Soulforce and the Equality Ride directly confront the institutions that produce this type of hatred”), his relationship is not.  If there is a relationship, that’s fine – I’m up-front about my own sympathies, so as to help the reader gauge my own detachment, or lack of it, from a story.  The tone of the story begs the question.

  * Maintain integrity by resisting pressure from advertisers and special interests to influence news coverage.

So why did Birkey’s piece not report the whole story?

 New Journalist Fellows are accountable to their readers, critics, advocates and each other as well as to the public at large.

OK.  From where does your organization’s money come?

We can start there!

  * Keep an open dialogue with the public in an effort to maintain and improve standards.

  * Encourage the public to use the information they have to question and analyze news stories on their own, and voice grievances when they feel stories are wrong.

  * Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
  * Expose unethical practices among each other and wherever they are found to maintain professional standards.

  * Keep the same high standards to which they hold others.

Hm. 

We’ll see, won’t we?

CORRECTION:  Of course, it’s Andy Birkey, not Matt.

One of the interesting things, to me, about the whole Marcotte kerfuffle was that you actually saw a bit if integrity on the part of many leftybloggers. While many among the thin film of left-leaning Christian bloggers were quite rightly offended by Marcotte’s raw bigotry (and John Edwards’ slimy cynicism), the interesting thing to me was that you didn’t see all that many bloggers on the infidel left complaining that Marcotte was much of an aberration. Oh, you saw the usual complaints of “she’s being taken out of context” (which pretty well deflated when one saw the context) – but I don’t think anyone ever tried the “most leftbloggers tolerate religion just fine” response.,

Which is good, because the tradition of bashing faith (or at least Christianity; Islam and non-observant, Israel-phobic Judaism are not quite so feared) is wide and deep on the left. Especially locally.

Not that finding it is especially interesting. PZ Meiers’ rote phumphering is sort of like Joan Jett playing “I Love Rock And Roll”; you know it’s coming, it’s always the same, whooeee.
And you read stuff from Mark Gisleson…:

I am certain that each and every day for centuries now somewhere in the world a Catholic nun or priest has done something extraordinarily good. I’m also sure most martyrs died nobly and were pure in their beliefs. And I’m even more sure that not once in the history of the Roman Catholic church has the hierarchy ever done the right thing, instead siding, consistently, with the monied and privileged.

…and wonder if he just didn’t get enough attention out of farting in church as a kid.

At any rate, the big, sweeping hatreds like Marcotte’s and Meiers’ don’t bother me as much as the casual bigotry that seeps into the daily exhortations of the “regular” leftybloggers (and the petty left in general). It’s there that the heart of the left lies.

Jeff Fecke – local rent-a-blogger who writes for Minnesota Monitor, an organization paid for by an organization that shares space with George Soros’ “Media Matters for America” (but which to the best of my knowledge has never revealed the source of its funding) but who sniffs and calls Michael Brodkob a paid republican operative, has apparently discovered a “talent” for Photoshop, linking to a piece in MinnMon about an incident in Sioux Center, Iowa, involving a group of gay activists’ vans being apparently vandalized with anti-gay graffiti.

Fecke’s headline:

Your Moment of Zen (or, that Vaunted Christian Tolerance)

Ah. So without knowing who were the suspects, Fecke blames the incident (assuming it was legitimate vandalism – and some interesting questions were raised in the MNMon comment section, which you should read) on Christians? And, more directly (given the wording and tone of his headline) a trait of people who call themselves Christian?

For starters, if we assume the incident was legitimate (and when it comes to local leftists’ stories of faith-based hate crimes, “trust but verify” is my philosophy – face it, local lefties, too many of your fellows have abused the media in the past), it most likely has much more to do with anti-gay sentiment that is still a deeply-ingrained part of much of rural America. Imagine if you will a bus full of Israelis at Berkeley or a van full of Young Republicans at Macalester, if you need help picturing the sort of provincial hatred that sort of exercise would conjure forth.

The whole exercise of the “Soul Force Equality Ride” – vans full of gay guys from Minneapolis driving through small towns – seems entirely designed to publicize the heretofore-unknown concept that there are anti-gay bigots in small towns. “Expect more events like these as Soulforce and the Equality Ride directly confront the institutions that produce this type of hatred”, MinnMon writer Andy Birkey breathlessly intones in the piece Fecke links; one wonders (“trust but verify”) if Birkey has seen an itinerary.

If the incident was legit, then it’d seem they got exactly what the wanted; bigotry’s been exposed! Mission accomplished! (Unless they left a group of missionaries in Sioux Center to try to perform outreach and change the local hearts and minds. I mean – what other purpose was there besides driving in, confronting, taking pictures and leaving? I’d invite any “SoulForce Rider” to comment and discuss this).

But what has this incident to do with Christianity?

Other than as a breathless frame-up (presuming legitimacy) of small-town redneck bigots? Not a whole lot.

Fecke’s broad brush is a sweeping indictment of Christian bigotry in the civil arena. And aside from providing the intellectual and moral framework for the renaissance and liberal democracy itself, inciting and focusing anti-slavery sentiment in the United States and Europe, driving the entire notion of social welfare for most of American history, and providing the moral background for the entire civil rights movement (led by white as much as black churches), I guess you could say Christians sure are bigots.

But only if your brush is broad enough to avoid things like “facts” and “details”.

CORRECTION:  Andy Birkey, not Matt.  Not sure where that came from.

We talked with Janet from SCSU Scholars about the drive get conservatives, veterans and other pro-Americans to go out to Washington next week to counterprotest the big lefty demonstrations scheduled for that weekend – to shield the Vietnam Memorial from their depredations.

Call 651.983.1431, or go to this site for more information.

If you’re interested, they’re organizing a bus ride to get interested Minnesotans out there.

Wish I could make it…

 Earlier this week, some of my commenters were piqued that I didn’t demand Ann Coulter have her head sawed off in the public square for using the anti-gay slur “F” word in referring to John Edwards.  I called it “bad form”, using my gift for understatement, and bemoaned the fact that Coulter’s constant “malaprops” (I wish I had the faith to believe that they actually are such) make life a lot harder for us conservatives in the trenches. 

Why didn’t I express sufficient outrage?  Partly because everyone else already was; the starchamber of mega conservative blogs have already put Coulter on their eternal spit list; what difference does it make if Mitch Berg piles on?

And partly because to do so would be to play Coulter’s game.  Inflammation is Coulter’s stock in trade, and she plies that trade better than most.  To hop up and down and wax purple over it would be like yelling at Madonna for trying to provoke, or at Michael Moore for tossing around baseless accusations, or at Lindsay Lohan for being a vacuous celebrity; it plays into the schtick.

And partly because I cling to a shred of fandom.  Coulter’s sharp, she’s incisive, and – when she’s not aiming to outrage, or doing it just for the flop of it – she’s better than most of her detractors. 

And finally, partly because I wanted to wait for someone to say what I wanted to say, only better. 

Which brings us to Mitch “The Other Mitch” Pearlstein’s letter on Coulter from the Center of the American Experiment.

Folks on the right often criticize folks on the left for not criticizing one of their own when they say something thoroughly offensive and stupid. To avoid countercharges, let it be known that I wasn’t a fan of Coulter and her style before last weekend and I’m even less so now, as her reference to presidential candidate John Edwards by the full two-syllable, homosexual-slur “F” word was galaxies beyond the pale. It was ugly and she ought to be ashamed, and frankly, I’m not too thrilled that her audience of conservative activists in Washington didn’t make their displeasure immediately clear.

And I agree.

Why was her jab at a joke so unacceptable? Because decent people just don’t talk like that, or at least they shouldn’t. And no, this is not because of overly sensitive, politically correct touchiness.

Pearlstein is right.  It’s something that goes far deeper than callow political correctness; one should treat people the way they’d like to be treated themselves.  Not that Coulter doesn’t come in for a lot of abuse from her detractors – in fact, much of it vastly more scabrous than anything Coulter herself has ever said – but that’s really no excuse.  One should try to be better than one’s opponents. 

But Coulter also was wrong because she was counterproductive. Conservatives are more inclined than liberals to challenge emotionally saturated initiatives, such as the drive for same-sex marriage. There’s not the smallest doubt in my mind that the overwhelming majority of us who oppose same-sex marriage do so honorably, as we simply (or not so simply) fear that such a radical change in our most important institution would not be in the best interests of society generally and children especially. But making such a case is increasingly hard if high-profile conservatives talk dirty.

Exactly.  It’s hard enough to cut through the noise that the left tosses in our faces without giving them more ammo.

Pearlstein notes the blazing contradiction between Coulter’s words and the conservative movement’s actions as manifested at CPAC:

… I’ve been intrigued by how well Rudy Giuliani is doing with Republicans across the country, social and religious conservatives evidently among ’em. You know the latter guys I’m talking about. All those Christians thumping without time, mercy or American place for anyone outside their parochial fold…Sure, it’s 20 months to Election Day, and by no means are all religious conservatives enamored with America’s Mayor. Not by several stretches. But for now, isn’t it more than a little elucidating that so many of them appear open to supporting a presidential candidate who doesn’t line up with them precisely on abortion, gun control and gay rights; who has been married three times; and who, for picturesque measure, has been famously photographed (I’m on real fragile ground here) wearing a dress?

Save for Coulter, what in the world is close-mindedness on the right coming to these days?

I wonder – if you posited that contradiction to a dogmoleftist like a Cenk Uyghur or a MNob, would their brain herniate?

Pearlstein notes the irony of the left’s charges as seen in his own life:

Oh, by the way, a well-known political/religious activist in Minneapolis of the larboard persuasion (that means left) recently declared at a community meeting on the North Side that American Experiment is anti-black and ultra-right-wing, not to mention “Klan-like.” My biracial daughter already has written him a respectfully nasty letter. Maybe some of my liberal friends will follow up, too.

Um, yeah, Mitch.  Let us know how that goes.

Because way too much of the left treats “nastiness” and “incivility” the same way Spike Lee treated racism; as something the left can’t be accused of, because they’ve got bigger things on their minds.

I’d say “the right needs to be better than that” – but really, we all do.

Debra Saunders dings on Algore – and, more importantly, the “carbon neutrality” cult in Hollywood:

I used to figure that rich sinners, who bought “indulgences” from the Catholic Church before the Protestant Reformation, would be ashamed of the bargain that other churchgoers looked upon with scorn and derision.

But lo, on Academy Awards night, the stars were quite impressed with themselves for participating in a “carbon-neutral” event. Cozy up to the Natural Resources Defense Council, and all those private flights, limo rides and multiple homes disappear. Almost like special effects.

I know that the word on many readers’ lips is: hypocrisy.

For those in Hollywood who esteem themselves as “leaders” in society’s fight to save itself (see also George Clooney’s speech at last year’s Oscarpalooza), one of the first principles of leadership is “never ask someone else to do what you’re not willing to do yourself”.

But the real issue is that the most effective spokesman for global warming apparently doesn’t think he has to show personal leadership by curbing his energy consumption. The same goes for [California’s SUV-driving Senator and “environmentalist” Diane] Feinstein and [California’s SUV-driving Governor and “environmentalist” Arnold] Schwarzenegger, who are happy to push for laws that make other people cut their emissions, but are far too affluent to cut back themselves.

“With the future so open to doubt,” Gore wrote in his 1992 book “Earth in the Balance,”we routinely choose to indulge our own generation at the expense of all who will follow.”

Now Gore has a spokesperson who explains his indulgence — er, offset — policy. And it apparently doesn’t matter that Gore’s behavior signals to global-warming agnostics (like me), and to global-warming believers, that the climate situation must not be that dire after all.

“Carbon neutrality” is to environmentalism was Scientology is to faith: a fabulist’s way of buying peace of mind.

When I see any of their motorcades switching to Priuses – er, Prii? – then maybe I’ll pay attention.

Being “carbon neutral” isn’t cutting carbon output; it’s playing a shell game that you hope everyone is too stupid to figure out.

Algore getting beaten up – from the left?

PETA slags Algore’s “Meat Addiction“, via Drudge:

Norfolk, Va. — This morning, PETA sent a letter to former vice president Al Gore explaining to him that the best way to fight global warming is to go vegetarian and offering to cook him faux “fried chicken” as an introduction to meat-free meals. In its letter, PETA points out that Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth—which starkly outlines the potentially catastrophic effects of global warming and just won the Academy Award for “Best Documentary”—has failed to address the fact that the meat industry is the largest contributor to greenhouse-gas emissions.

“No, we’re the People’s Front of Judea…”

Saint Paul will be getting the 2008 GOP National Convention.

The good news:  They have selected a planner:

A federal Transportation Department official and former Republican Party operative will decide where delegates sit, how to keep the media happy and what events to stage at the 2008 Republican National Convention in the Twin Cities.

Maria Cino, who was named deputy secretary of transportation two years ago by President Bush and was his national political director in 2000, will be the Republican National Committee’s lead planner for the convention, committee spokesperson Chris Taylor said Monday.

Cino will work with the local host committee and city officials to coordinate an event that’s expected to draw more than 45,000 people — including delegates, media and visitors — to the Twin Cities…Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn, said Cino was the perfect choice to bring people together in planning the convention.

“Throughout her exemplary career, Maria Cino has been known for her ability to roll up her sleeves and get things done,” he said.

So far so good.

Of course, for the 75-odd-percent of my adopted hometown that votes DFL – and for the 5-20% of that number who could fairly be called the “lunatic fringe” – it’s all about them:

  At the first of three St. Paul forums on the convention Monday morning, officials heard concerns about limited access to downtown, protesters and taxpayer liabilities…Some, like West Side resident Gerry Berquist, said they want officials to ensure that protesters are treated fairly and that downtown business won’t be adversely affected.

“There needs to be a huge community gathering so that these questions can be asked,” he said.

Bergquist’s remarks are the tip of the iceberg.  The local left – expressing their wishes on a number of local email discussion forums and blogs – want unprecedented access to the XCel Energy Center during the convention.  Some of them want absolutely untrammelled access to not only the facility, and to the President himself, but even to the conventiongoers as they go about their daily business.  Some want to “debate” convention delegates on the street – “debates” that sound in most cases more like harassment – in order to perhaps “educate” them.  When questioned, they seem to studiously avoid references to their more deranged cohorts, as if they’re just no way an anti-Republican demonstrator will cause problems.

I have a couple of ideas in response:

• Democrats – let’s meet out on the street for a real debate.  Send your people up against the legion of right-leaning bloggers that’ll be descending on the event.  See who “educates” whom.
• While we’re so concerned about free speech (and I am in fact a bigger proponent of genuine free speech than any “liberal” I know), how about we think globally before acting locally.  Start by lifting the free speech restrictions at the St. Paul Planned Parenthood clinic.  What?  You say you can’t, because a deranged person might commit violence against some innocent customer?  Hm.  Are we seeing the disconnect yet?

Counting the hours until 9/08.

Closed-Circuit to Ann Coulter:  Keep your foot out of your mouth.  Calling people “faggot” is bad form, and gives the bad guys cheap points; it’s like losing at touchdown because of a holding call.

Which is especially imporant, since when you don’t have all of your friends backing away for you because of dumb misbegotten “jokes” like calling Silkypony a “faggot” (and getting excoriated by the same people who insist John Kerry’s “be dumb and go to Iraq” jape was a “joke”, ironically enough),  you really do hit the nail on the head.

Like with your latest Wpiece on Algore and Leo D, on your website:

[The global warming scolds] think they can live in a world of only Malibu and East Hampton — with no Trentons or Detroits. It does not occur to them that someone has to manufacture the tiles and steel and glass and solar panels that go into those “eco-friendly” mansions, and someone has to truck it all to their beachfront properties, and someone else has to transport all the workers there to build it. And then someone has to drive the fleets of trucks delivering the pachysandra and bottled water every day.

Liberals are already comfortably ensconced in their beachfront estates, which they expect to be unaffected by their negative growth prescriptions for the rest of us.

Arguing with a liberal about the environment:

CONSERVATIVE: Um, the Kyoto accords would spark a worldwide depression.
LIBERAL:  Bush scuttled the Kyoto accords!  Halliburton!  Halliburton!

CONSERVATIVE:  Er, actually Clinton – with Gore as his veep – kinda did that.
LIBERAL: Bush scuttled the Kyoto accords!  Halliburton!  Halliburton!

CONSERVATIVE:  A global depression could starve tens of millions of people.
LIBERAL: Bush scuttled the Kyoto accords!  Halliburton!  Halliburton!

CONSERVATIVE:  Um – hey, pitchers and catchers reported for spring training!
LIBERAL: Bush scuttled the Kyoto accords!  Halliburton!  Halliburton!

Coulter:

“Global warming” is the lefts pagan rage against mankind. If we cant produce industrial waste, then we cant produce. Some of us — not the ones with mansions in Malibu and Nashville is my guess — are going to have to die. To say we need to reduce our energy consumption is like saying we need to reduce our oxygen consumption.Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate poor blacks, DDT opponent Rachel Carson wanted to eliminate Africans introduction to her book “Silent Spring” written by … Al Gore, and population-control guru Paul Ehrlich wants to eliminate all humans.

That, and/or create policies to make mass human death pretty much inevitable.

If western agriculture becomes hobbled by massive, Kyoto-induced cutbacks in fossil fuel use for agriculture (not to mention the manufacture of things like tractors, fertilizer, pesticides and so on) ,who will feed all those people in Congo, Darfur, Somalia…

It’s just supposed to happen, right, Algore, Leo and Missy?

Earlier, I pounded on Nick Coleman for repeating the talking-point trope about Algore’s store-bought “carbon-neutrality”. 

Via Jay Reding, we see the Economist does, too.

This is, of course, ridiculous.  When you donate money to build a new windfarm, you don’t take any of the old, polluting power offline; you increase the supply of power, reducing the price until others are encouraged to buy more carbon-emitting power.  On the margin, it may make some difference, since demand for electricity is not perfectly elastic, but nowhere near the one-for-one equivalence that carbon offsets would seem to suggest.  Especially since the worst offenders, big coal-fired plants, are not the ones that renewables will substitute for; solar and wind power are not good replacements for baseload power.  Instead, renewables are likely to take relatively clean (and expensive) natural gas plants offline, since those are the ones that provide “extra” power to the system. Similarly, by giving villagers in Goa energy-saving CFL bulbs, you do not lessen the amount of electricity consumed; rather, you make it possible for other people to purchase the extra energy freed up by more efficient lightbulbs.  This may be excellent poverty policy, but it does not lessen the carbon footprint of your international flight.

 Reding (emphasis mine):

Gore’s not even close to “carbon-neutral.” It’s not physically possible to consume as much as he does and plant enough trees to make a difference. It’s all a way of deflecting the very well warranted charges of hypocrisy being leveled against him.

It’s worse than that, of course; the Economist piece notes that Algore’s immense power usage is after the amount saved by the “greeniness” of the Gore mansion, the solar panels, etc, etc. 

Read the whole thing.  Keep it handy the next time someone tries to use “carbon-neutrality” as a sop for Algore’s extravagance.

Whenever a smug, sanctimonious, unctuous liberal demigogue anywhere is under attack, you can count on someone in the Strib front office to stand up and be counted.

And with Algore’s hypocritical, power-guzzling ways (and, moreover, his lame “carbon-credit” defense) being heckled off the stage of public opinion, it makes sense that that someone is Nick Coleman.  A fellow child of political power, a fellow patrician grown accustomed to lecturing the hopeless hoi-polloi, both with hours of, um, fascinating stories to relate the sixties to today, Coleman is the Algore’s perfect defender.

It’s all so – unfair, says Coleman:

After his film about global warming won an Oscar on Sunday, Al Gore basked in the adulation of Hollywood.

You knew he’d get paid back.

No, Nick.  We knew he’d give us plenty of material. You do understand the difference, right?

The right-wing wood-chippers have been chewing Gore into little pieces ever since.

COLEMAN BS ALERT:  Actually, the story came out in The Chattanoogan – not exactly part of the Right Wing Noise Machine. 

They didn’t enjoy the joke when Gore reached into his tux and pulled out a phony presidential campaign announcement before the Oscar orchestra drummed him off stage.

Truth be told, I actually did get a laugh out of that.  Whatever his faults, Algore – like the President, actually – can occasionally poke fun at himself.  I’ll give him that much.

Strike two, Nick. 

The very sight of Gore offends people who think the Supreme Court ruled he should never again be seen in public. Those folks can’t forgive Gore for continuing to draw breath.

(Closed circuit to Nick Coleman’s nonexistent editor:  Isn’t that not only a little hyperbolic, but kind of clubfisted and inarticulate?  And, by the way, as we saw with Vice President Cheney’s brush with the Taliban this past week, it’s not the right that goes about wishing death on people…)

But what really got the phlegm flying on talk radio was the “gotcha” from a conservative group that outed the former vice president as a Limousine Electricity user. Zap.

Last year, Gore’s mansion used almost 20 times as much electricity as the average American home. Take that, you Hollywood types.

Everyone loves a juicy bit of hypocrisy, and I am prepared to believe a politician might say one thing in public and act another way in private. But the Gore electricity kerfuffle offers an opportunity for Americans to point a finger.

At ourselves.

Before Nick begins the real purpose of this column – a rote transcription of talking points – let’s set a few things straight.

I’m far from above conserving.  Of course, in my case it’s not a matter of buying into a fabian socialist scare story; it’s because I’m half Norwegian, and I like to squeeze twelve cents out of a dime, and I’m all for sending less of my take-home pay to Excel Energy.  Or to the House of Saud, for that matter.  It’s a market prerogative, and I’m doing my best to vote with my feet and my wallet.

I mentioned “fabian socialist talking points”:

The science on global warming is convincing [Hah!], and so is the need to throttle back on our polluting energy ways.

“The best response to Al Gore’s energy usage is for us to think about our own,” says Michael Noble, executive director of Fresh Energy, a St. Paul-based nonprofit group.

The group is working to develop a “clean, efficient and fair” energy system (www.fresh-energy.org). “We all ought to be looking at the automobile we drive, how we heat our house, whether it’s insulated, whether we have efficient appliances, and how to reduce our fossil fuel use.”

When non-profits start talking about making things “fair”, it’s time to keep one hand on your wallet and the other on your Constitution.

No, we don’t have to live in cold, dark caves, Noble says. The issue is about taking responsibility for our energy use, while supporting efforts to “change the entire energy system, top to bottom, to substitute energy-efficient and carbon-free energy for fossil fuels which lead to warming.”

Of course, the market will do that, on its own.  It got a major boost this past two years, as gas prices jumped over $3 a gallon; SUV sales plummeted, people took a serious look at hybrids (and found them largely wanting), alternative energy started to show at least fringe-y signs of being viable someday, and even environmentalists started reconsidering their generation-old hysteria against nuclear power.

Gore, by the way, offsets his fossil-fuel use by paying extra for renewable energy credits.

This was ignored by the talk-radio goobers, but the idea is simple: For a small extra charge, pennies per kilowatt hour, you can “buy” renewable energy credits from your energy company, which uses the money (it is carefully audited) to buy that amount of nonpolluting power (such as wind energy) for its system rather than building more power plants.

Oh, it hasn’t been “ignored” at all.  We’ll be talking about the “Carbon-neutral” flimflam this weekend on the NARN, most likely.

“The scientific evidence is rock-solid,” says Noble. “The only solution to global warming is to reduce our total carbon emissions by 80 percent. Al Gore has helped get that message across.”

Even if Tipper leaves the laundry room lights on.

The evidence is far from “rock-solid”, and Coleman’s attempt at spin control ignores the real point:  Algore, the carbon scold, is an energy-guzzling hypocrite; this past week, his motto – “conservation for me, but not for thee”, became clear.

And we’re making sure the world knows it.

…who listened to Melissa Etheridge’s dreary, tedious “best song”-winning tune (and preachy, sanctimonious acceptance) at the Oscars on Sunday…

…and found himself fondly, wistfully remembering the Three Six Mafia?

The Airport Commission is debating the Moslem cabbies’ “right” to refuse service to people with alcohol.

I’ve had about enough of these idiots:

Many cabbies disagreed, saying that the proposal denies them the right to freely practice their religion.

“This is discrimination,” proclaimed Ahmed Shine, a taxi driver for seven years.

No, it’s a “job condition”.  If my religion forbade me from watching people use software, my employer would be well within its rights to toss me.  Ditto the MAC.

And the MAC isn’t saying you can’t drive a cab.  Merely that you can’t drive one on its turf, the airport.

Beyond that, Ahmed?  Stand on principle!  Refuse the booze!  Eke out a living hauling welfare fares home from the grocery store (no booze there!).

Abdifatah Abdi, who said he was speaking for an association of cabdrivers, said the commissioners “will be judged on your decision.”You are deciding the livelihood of 600 drivers and their families,” Abdi said. “Say no to discrimination. Say yes to justice for the weak.”

Then go out and get a job where you don’t have to deal with infidels!

Seriously, what’s next?  Refusing to serve women who aren’t wearing chador?

Go drive your cab in Mogadishu.

Katherine Kersten takes on the U of M’s doltish decision to give Algore a PhD in…something.

Rad the whole thing.  But I liked the decision – “what degree?”

Early on, the doctorate in science had an edge. But the recently released summary of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change changed all that. It made clear that a centerpiece of Gore’s sky-is-falling claim — ocean levels rising 20 feet as a near term prospect — is wildly off base. The panel projects that by 2100, sea level will rise a mere 7 to 23 inches.

So how about an honorary doctorate of laws, based on Gore’s efforts on behalf of the Kyoto global warming treaty? Unfortunately, skeptics might point out that Gore couldn’t even talk Bill Clinton into submitting the treaty to Congress, after the Senate voted 95-0 for a resolution discouraging it, and that compliance has been poor among countries that did sign the treaty.

Humane letters? Naw, that’s not for real men like Al.

Which degree will it be? The Daily article contains a clue. It quoted Ingrid Scantlebury, a precocious U of M freshman not yet caught up in the Gore glow. According to the Daily, Scantlebury “agrees with Gore’s work but doesn’t feel the university should award him a degree for it. ‘It’s mainly a publicity thing,’ she said.”

You guessed it — Gore’s going to get a special honorary doctorate in marketing.

I think “Creative Writing” or “American Fiction” would do, too…

I’m of two minds about this story, about Alabama’s Stillman College hosting a conference on…not race relations in general, but the “N” word itself:

With a debate swirling nationwide over the n-word, a historically black college in Alabama has set aside four days to discuss the racial slur.Participants at the conference, which began Thursday and ends Sunday, discussed topics ranging from the origins of the epithet to whether juggling a few letters makes it socially acceptable at the NSurrection Conference at Stillman College.

Organizers said the goal of the event is to challenge the use of the n-word “through the use of intelligent dialogue and a thorough examination of black history.”

Debate over the use of the word has escalated in recent months, with comedian Michael Richards racial rant prompting black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson and California Rep. Maxine Waters to urge the public and the entertainment industry to stop using it.

Uh…waitaminnit.

Is there really “debate” over the word? Doesn’t pretty much everyone agree that it’s wrong?

Well, of course not; the conference does indeed address the very incongruity that has gone through every thinking person’s mind since they saw Richard Pryor’s first movie; why the “N-word” is the most caustic word in the history of the language when some people say it, and a term of endearment when others do:

“I really think that as far as white people are concerned, the word is almost on its way out,” said Hacker, who is white. “That said, there are a lot of white people who still in the privacy of their own minds think the word even if they don’t use it because they regard black people as genetically inferior and that word categorizes that.”

Kovan Flowers, co-founder of AbolishTheNWord.com, said striking the word from use would help set an example for other races.

“We can’t say anything to Hispanics, or whites or whoever unless we stop using it ourselves,” he said. “It’s the root of the mind-set that’s affecting why people are low, from housing to jobs to education.”

Stillman senior Maurice Williams said he organized the conference hoping to educate his peers about the history of the word. The event includes a community fair, charity basketball game, unity march and discussions ranging from the word’s origin to its use among various ethnic groups.

“I had to understand that a lot of the images that we portray in television, in the media, in the hip-hop environment — all of those things have the same connotations as the n-word itself, so therefore it’s the n-word personified,” Williams said. “Where do you see another culture portraying some of these same images?”

Not just “where”, but “why”?

Rapper Tupac Shakur was credited with legitimizing the term “nigga” when he came out with the song “N.I.G.G.A.,” which he said stood for “Never Ignorant Getting Goals Accomplished.”

Stillman English professor Alisea McLeod said she doesn’t buy it.

“It’s hogwash. What this is really indicative of is a heart problem,” she said. “What is coming out of mouths is what is coming out of souls. These are not words that are uplifting and I think (they) point to a bigger problem — a lack of self-love.”

“Self-love”, perhaps.

Self-awareness, as well. Shakur’s “Strictly 4 Ma N.I.G.G.A.Z.” came out in 1993, two years after “N.W.A“, short for “N___z With Attitude”, a group that achieved immense success without the benefit of any radio airplay in the late eighties. It also happened nearly two decades after Richard Pryor released “That N_____’s Crazy”, his first big mainstream success.

Wanna get rid of the word? Stop saying it.

Climatologist Patrick Michaels on the inconvenient facts :

The main point of the movie is that, unless we do something very serious, very soon about carbon dioxide emissions, much of Greenland’s 630,000 cubic miles of ice is going to fall into the ocean, raising sea levels over twenty feet by the year 2100.

Where’s the scientific support for this claim? Certainly not in the recent Policymaker’s Summary from the United Nations’ much anticipated compendium on climate change. Under the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s medium-range emission scenario for greenhouse gases, a rise in sea level of between 8 and 17 inches is predicted by 2100. Gore’s film exaggerates the rise by about 2,000 percent.

Even 17 inches is likely to be high, because it assumes that the concentration of methane, an important greenhouse gas, is growing rapidly. Atmospheric methane concentration hasn’t changed appreciably for seven years, and Nobel Laureate Sherwood Rowland recently pronounced the IPCC’s methane emissions scenarios as “quite unlikely.”

I’ll wait for the book.

But the movie’s got a good shot at the Oscar on pure Bush-bashing points alone.

I’ll be at the Patriot’s Oscar broadcast tomorrow evening at the St. Paul Hotel.

And according to Nikki Finkke, we could be there mighty late:

Sunday nights Academy Awards telecast could end up the longest on record. Thats the prediction Ive been given by one VIP who helps oversee this 79th Oscars and is therefore in a position to know.

We’ll be there with  Michael Medved, talking about the event as it happens.

Which is just about the only way you can get me to watch the Oscars – at the St. Paul with a couple hundred of my closest friends!

At first, I thought I might say “I have had days like this”.  The story, about a Crookston couple skipped town leaving their kids behind, almost sounded grimly funny at first:

Even before they left in September, the complaint said, food supplies had dwindled, bills had piled up and the landlord was talking about evicting them. Her son and his fiancée took care of the girls for a time, and the couple have been reported to be in Montana or Wyoming.

Now the girls are in foster care and a warrant has been issued for the couples arrest on gross misdemeanor charges of child neglect.

The son, Aaron Merck, 21, said Wednesday that his mother phoned himin Bagley, Minn., a few days after the couple left Crookston and said, “You wont believe what I did. … I left.”

When Merck asked his mother what she meant, he said that she told him: “Im in Montana right now,” and that she wasnt planning on returning.

When he asked whether the girls knew, Merck said his mother replied: “I told them I had to work late.”

The temptation, truly, is often there.

Of course, it’s really not funny at all…

Merck, who now lives in Thief River Falls, Minn., said his mother was stressed out by the younger daughter, who had been dating men in their 20s.

He said the girls went into foster care in November after he and his fiancée, who are expecting a baby, decided they could no longer afford to care for them. A third daughter, who is an adult, also helped out, he said.

Jennifer Anderson has been married four or five times, her son said. The family moved around a lot before settling in what police investigator Aaron Pry and neighbors called a “quiet neighborhood” in Crookston.

Criminal complaints and other sources offered this picture of family dysfunction, instability and abuse:

William, 44, and Jennifer, 42, dated for two years and married a year ago. Four months into their marriage, William was charged with terroristic threats for allegedly threatening to kill the girls and their mother. Authorities say he was drinking at the time.

William becomes physically violent only when he drinks, but he can be verbally abusive anytime, a complaint quoted Jennifer as telling police. William Andersons mother told an officer that he had been jailed for assaulting his ex-wife.

And so on, and so forth.

The greatest line in Keanu Reeves’ career; “you have to have a license to drive a car, but any a****le can be a parent…”

The MN House of Representatives is taking an online poll about HF 305, the proposed statewide smoking ban.

Much as I hate cigarette smoke, it’s a stupid bill and it needs to be stopped.

Of course, the power-grabbers have packed the polls. 

That’s where you come in.  Go here and vote.  Vote your conscience, naturally; I know I did.

I say let the states decide about abortion.

But let them know the facts, too.

A premature baby that doctors say spent less time in the womb than any other surviving infant is to be released from a Florida hospital Tuesday.

Amillia Sonja Taylor was just 9 1/2 inches long and weighed less than 10 ounces when she was born Oct. 24. She was delivered 21 weeks and six days after conception. Full-term births come after 37 to 40 weeks.

“We werent too optimistic,” Dr. William Smalling said Monday. “But she proved us all wrong.”

The “What is Viable” threshold has always been a fuzzy, indistinct one; I always figure a “fetus” isn’t viable until it can get a job and rent an apartment.

But 22 weeks?

How anyone can support abortion based on “nonviability” after the fourth month just astounds me.

Women, in general, have an insurmountable advantage in custody trials, especially if the kids involved are younger than four years old. It’s almost impossible for a woman to lose under those circumstances, barring crack addiction (maybe) and gross moral turpitude. Especially if the fathers are famously moronic.

And yet…

But [Britney Spears] stayed less than 24 hours before returning to California, where she briefly visited her sons in Malibu before shaving off her hair, getting tattooed and dashing to a hospital in the early hours and asking for help.

K-Fed? If it’s legal vindication you want, you married and divorced the right chick.

Maybe.