“Be careful what you wish for.  You may get it”.

That old adage has been proven truer than ever today, as Nih[i]list in Golf Pants not only loses in its nakedly transparent bid for a repeat win in the coveted (by leftybloggers and Nihilist) City Pages “Best Blogger (Right Wing)” award.

The extent to which so-called “conservative” bloggers Nihililst, Sisyphus and JB were willing to whore and befoul themselves for this piece of filthy, patchouli-reeking lucre is obvious in their despair (emphasis added):

We’ve come up with hilarious top 11 list after hilarious top 11 list, some even anti-Republican. We’ve taken shots at right-wing bloggers that City Pages hates like Power Line and Mitch Berg. We even turned down the $20 cash Swiftee offered us to remove our Best of the Cities 2006 link thingee. We’ve done everything it takes to repeat, except one thing: draw cartoons.

Turning on the Republican bloggers who nurtured them.  Stabbing (in an ineffectual way) those who supported them.  Sniffing Paul Demko’s farts. 

You almost feel sorry for them. 

Almost. 

Sorry for the “loss”, NIGP crew.  But it’s good that you’ve shown your true, “blue” colors.

I bet those lattes at Lurcat talking about The Current, those evenings at Chino debating the labor theory of value, and those nights at the Bryant Lake Bowl watching nude lesbian poetry slams seem pretty hollow now, don’t they?

I have been wanting to dash off a post for the past couple of days about one of the funniest Onion pieces ever – “This American Life Completes Documentation Of Liberal, Upper-Middle-Class Existence” – but Chad beat me to it.

So read ’em both!

I spent a couple of hours last night at Minnesota Public Radio’s UBS Auditorium, the huge top of the MPR’s Taj MaKling, their immense downtown Saint Paul headquarters.

I was a guest on “In The Loop“, a newish MPR public affairs program hosted by Jeff Horwich. Word had gotten to Horwich that I was a conservative who was interested in the whole topic of the planned protests at next year’s GOP National Convention.

More on that later.

As I’ve written in the past, once you get past the whole “public” nature of Public Radio – the fact that taxes go to support what is in essence a medium catering to a specific socio-political niche – there is actually some excellent stuff out there. And “In The Loop” is certainly an interesting experiment. I’ll give the Loop crew this; file away your “Delicious Dish”/Terry Gross “Good Times/Good Times” stereotypes. It’s a fun, fast-paced, eclectic show, recorded live in front of a studio audience (and edited for time and to cut out flubs – it is public radio, after all). Horwich, a talented, personable guy (at from my first impression, as a guest) is a good interviewer. And he seems to have done a good job, tonight at least, of seeking some sort of balance in stacking the show. The show takes an hour (more like 90 minutes before editing) and talks about an issue – in this case, activism from the very personal to the very public (which was where I came in).
Again – more on that later.

———-

After almost thirty years, off and on (mostly off) of working in radio stations that were tucked above drug stores and into transmitter sheds, MPR is something else; big, clean, Scandinavian, expansive, an equipment geek’s dream. The UBS Auditorium feels like a lecture hall at a well-endowed university, with theatrical lighting, badonkadonk acoustics, and a gorgeous north (?) facing view of downtown Saint Paul.

———-

The culture shock continued when I saw the way the show ran.  Where  commercial talk show involves a host or two, a board operator, and maybe a call screener (and on major-league talk shows like Limbaugh they might add a person or two to do on-the-fly research), a National/Minnesota Public Radio show involves a crew that, to my commercial-radio tastes, looks more like the crew for a good-sized TV production.

The show included the host, at least four producers (one of whom acted as a combination stage manager and technical director, calling instructions to the booth staff into a wireless mic as he maneuvered about the floor), at least three engineers that I could see (two or in the large booth at the back of the room running the recording, the lights and the Powerpoint slides that ran behind the interstitial recorded bits, plus one running the house sound from a big mixer back to the audience’s left).  The show’s closing credits ran on a long time, listing close to a dozen people.  Plus the band.

To produce a one-hour, monthly show. 

Not criticizing.  Just saying – to my frugal, commercial-radio-raised tastes, it was like being in a foreign country.

———-

The first guest was songwriter Larry Long, a local folkie in the Pete Seeger mold – musically and politically – who played a couple of songs. A local “storyteller” read a couple of poems. “The Smarts”, a three-guy jazz combo, provided some occasional hilarious bumper music (a jazzy version of “Smells Like Teen Spirit” after…well, we’ll get to that).

There were some recorded segments of interviews with people discovering activism and protest in various ways.

And then it was my turn.

———-

I was on a panel with a cute-as-a-bug twentysomething named Erica, from some anti-war organization (the name sounded similar enough to every other anti-war group out there that I involuntarily started replaying the “People’s Front of Judea” sketch in my head).

Her line; she and her fellow protesters want to show the “ruling class” in this county – the one coming to the GOP convention – what anger was all about. They want to block freeways, raise havoc – in her words, they want to break up the convention, in as many words.

Y’know – to teach Republicans a lesson about democracy. The message seemed to be “My ends justify my means!”, delivered in a perky chirp with just a tinge of Valleygirl.

I tried to respond. Horwich split the time – under ten minutes – pretty evenly. Which, being as used to co-hosting a two hours show as I am, was very, very difficult!

I was nearly a loss as to how to respond. The ruling class? Does my boss know this? At any rate, it was hard to find a way to engage her; she seemed to believe her feelings about the President trumped everyone else’s right to participate in a democracy – a point I tried to make several times. Between the fact that Horwich kept the interview zipping along (it’s a live show, after all) and the fact that, like most anti-war protesters, “Erica” would zip away from topics when cornered like a greased rhetorical pig made me pine for my nice, long-form talk-radio interview format.

Still, check it out; it’ll be on at 9PM tonight, and 6PM Sunday on your area MPR affiliate or online.

While Erika slipped away without a word to me, Larry Long and the whole MPR crew were exceptionally gracious; any thoughts of being trapped in the belly of a left-of-center beast were…well, not untrue, but whether you chalk it up to good manners, love of a good debate, or professional polish, everyone I met – Horwich, his producers, the show staff, and the other MPR staff present – was way beyond civil, and downright friendly.

Leaving philosophical problems with taxpayer-funded media aside (let’s face it, MPR could most likely support itself), In the Loop is an interesting experiment – think of it as a live This Minnesota Life with an audience.  At any rate, it’s well worth a listen.

A couple of weeks ago, while “reporting” on John Kline’s town meeting – in which the congressman spent two hours answering unscreened questions from an audience that was not in any way vetted for friendliness – Jeff Fecke, “reporter” for the Minnesota Monitor (a “progressive” group blog funded by a group of deep-pocketed Washington liberals), editorialized…:

The Kline camp went into this meeting terrified of…something.  I’m not sure what. 

That’s right; after a career that’s taken him to USMC Officer Candidate School, flying choppers in Vietnam, a stint carrying the nuclear “football”, and beating an entrenched incumbent on his own turf, Ace Reporter Jeff Fecke thought Rep. John Kline (Colonel, USMC, Retired) was “terrified” of questions from a bunch of doughy, patchouli-reeking BDS victims.

So what did MinnMon have to say about this sign of abject terror – Mike Ciresi’s four-minute bump-and-flee with reporters as he announced his candidacy?

Two hours versus four minutes.  What’s he afraid of?????

Oh – they said nothing. Doyyy.

For more on Minnesota Monitor’s “journalistic ethics”, check out Foot’s evisceration piece here.

No matter how they undercut the military, no matter what loathing they pour upon America’s system and elected adminsitration and capitalist system and history, no matter what horrors they’ve coddled as they do so, it’s established that one dare not call any liberal “unpatriotic”, for fear of being called an ugly angry conservative.

But apparently, if you’re a major-league leftyblogger, wanting to keep more of the money you earn not only makes you unpatriotic, but it means you hate democracy.

It’s not a coincidence that Grover Norquist, the architect of the right-wing ascension to power, runs an organization called Americans for Tax Reform.  People like Norquist, who are charlatans at heart and deeply unpatriotic and immoral, use the complexity in the tax code that they help to create to persuade Americans that taxes are bad.  This is also true in states all over the country, where it is the unpredictability of property tax burdens and not the amount that causes schools to go wanting for funding.

Our tax code is the DNA of our nation’s moral compass.  I am proud to pay taxes because I take pride in America, and paying some tiny burden to keep our society running is an extremely small price to pay for being able to call myself an American citizen.  The old expression ‘you get what you pay for’ is apt for all sorts of situations.  People tend to express what they value in how much they are willing to pay for it.  I am willing and feel privileged for the right to pay for my country.  The right-wing is embittered to do so, if they do so at all.  And that, more than anything, says something about how much they value this experiment called America

No, Matt Stoller; as Thomas Jefferson himself averred, keeping a lid on the size, power and appetite of government is fundamentally American and itself deeply patriotic; our founding fathers believed that government was not so much an enemy (let’s be realistic) as a animal that needed to be kept tame.

But much more important for this “experiment called America” is the ability and willingness to accept that dissent and difference aren’t themselves base and evil. 

Not to do so is a form of moral retardation that is itself deeply antithetical to what this country is about.

Go over Ed’s and wish him good luck on his career change.

On Monday, I start my new full-time position with Blog Talk Radio as Political Director and will provide full-time commentary through my blog and my new daily BTR show. The phrase “dream come true” is hackneyed, but in this case the cliché applies.

BTR is making a good investment!

Changing careers can feel like stepping off the end of a dock with a blindfold on.  I’ve changed careers twice (like Ed, now); I was lucky the first time, in that going from radio to technical writing was a huge step up in pay and stability.  Changing from that into what I do now – Human Experience Design – was much more a leap of faith, since it was a market that hadn’t really taken off in the Twin Cities when I made the jump (although, gratifyingly, it has in the nine years since).

Jumping from service management to Blog Talk Radio, of course, is a huge leap of faith, but Ed’s the kind of guy who’ll make it work.

But everyone wish him good luck anyway!

In the past week, the house of cards has collapsed of its own febrile weight.  The Duke Lacrosse Rape case is no more.  There was no there, there.  Mike Nifong apparently ginned the whole thing up based on a fraudulent story, in a (successful) bid to pander for votes.

It has been, as a lawyer acquaintance noted, one of the most devastating shut-downs in the history of American jurisprudence, that rare case of misconduct so grotesque it may well take down an elected prosecutor.  Go ahead, look and see how common that is.

Jeff Fecke – local rent-a-blogger who works for “Minnesota Monitor”, the local plutolefty group blog, for which he took a “pledge” to be a good, balanced journalist – has been among the most vitriolic in condemning not only the accused, but those who assailed DA Nifong for what increasingly seemed to be gross misconduct (as, eventually, turned out to be fact), and in the end men as a gender.

Now, nobody’s accused Jeff of being the most discerning blogger.  Last fall, when local conservative bloggers launched charges [as yet unanswered] that Minnesota Monitor was supported by George Soros and other left-of-center plutocrats, Jeff responded with a photoshopped “cartoon” of local conservative bloggers, including me; (To be fair, he’s a better cartoonist than Ken Avidor.  To be fairer, neither of them is as visually or comedically talented as Swiftee). The balloon over my head has me saying something like “I’ll do what I always do – lead off with an unsubstantiated allegation” (or words to that effect.  I’m not going to go looking for it!).   

Cue Alannis Morrisette.

The subject of sexual assault rates an entire category on “Blog of the Moderate Left”, his long-running leftyblog; it includes many nuggets of wisdom (including putting the words “I am a rapist” in Vox Day’s mouth).

But on the issue of the Duke lacrosse case, he’s been modestly prolific – and immodestly absolutist in his conclusions.

On the third indictment, last fall:

A team captain.  Cue defense whining about how this is totally a witch hunt.

Interesting, since I thought Nifong was only trying this case to win the primary.

That’d be one of the “snarks by negation” that leftyblogs have perfected – and by “perfected” I mean “beat to death to the point where it’s become a stylistic cliche almost too depressing to mock anymore”.

Ironic in retrospect, though, huh?

On the news that one of the [formerly] accused had been convicted of assault against a gay guy:

I don’t know if either suspect is guilty [of the rape charge].  (I have my suspicions.)  But it does appear that these weren’t poor, innocent naifs who got set up by a scheming, drunk, black stripper.

Ah.  The old “it appears to me” standard.

On the first two arrests:

Well, I guess the case isn’t wholly without merit after all:  

Two 20-year-old Duke University lacrosse players were arrested early Tuesday on charges of raping and kidnapping a stripper hired to dance at an off-campus party.

Reade Seligmann posted a $400,000 bond and Collin Finnerty was in the process of doing so for the same amount, said Col. George Naylor of the Durham County jail. By posting bond, the players avoided making an initial court appearance later in the day.

Now, of course, we enter the twilight phase where there’ll be plenty of ad hominem attacks launched against the victim, because that’s how you defend an accused rapist–by turning the tables and smearing the accuser.  I wonder why rape is underreported?

I wonder why fraudulent charges aren’t reported often enough? 

On the lack of DNA evidence that was the first big hole in Nifong’s “Case”:

Orenthal James Simpson is almost certainly guilty of having killed two people, but a jury of his peers felt differently, and thus he walks free today, hunting for the “real killer” on golf courses throughout America.

Keep this in mind as people try to tell you that the absence of DNA evidence in the Duke Lacrosse rape case is proof that the men are innocent, and the woman is lying

If OJ did it, a bunch of privileged white kids must have done it!

Back before there were any arrests – back when it was just the “victim’s” word against every college kid (race indeterminate) in the greater Duke area, Jeff – perhaps overestimating his blog’s reach – called out:

There is no honor in covering up rape. Ever. So long as you remain silent, three rapists remain free–and so long as you remain silent, you give your assent that this is okay.

And that makes you almost as bad as them.

Got that?  It’s all our our fault!

That was as far as I could get. 

So, leftybloggers; Jeff Fecke indicted and convicted not only the Duke Lacrosse players – and a good chunk of male American to boot.

When comes the part that a “journalist” would get to next?  Apologizing for the slander on the characters of the three who were wrongly charged?  Apologizing for denying them the slim dignity that all accused in this country are supposed to be accorded – the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty?

Apologizing for denying them, over the past year, the one courtesy the media – every journalist – is supposed to accord the accused in this country; referring to their alleged guilt, rather than stating it as a proven fact?

Where is the justice?

(more…)

As I’ve noted in the past, when I want badly-thought-out analysis of events that substitutes snark for logic, I turn to area leftyblogger Cucking Stool.

And I usually turn right away, because – sheesh, it’d be like fisking the senile or the handicapped.

But Mr. Stool’s outdone himself this time, going past merely dumb and swerving into broad, group-based character assassination, commenting about local conservative bloggers’ attacks on Al Franken’s old anti-gay “jokes”:

Geez, you go on vacation for a couple of weeks, and when you get back, there’s been a sea change in where the parties stand.

That, or  you really weren’t very sure of it before  you went on vacation, Cuck. 

 Conservative bloggers are now the defenders of gays and lesbians. Several right-wing bloggers are attacking Democratic Senate candidate Al Franken for some skits and comments he made more than 30 years ago that they, with their finely tuned sensitivities, construe as possibly antigay.

Really, Cuck?  The crack about our “sensitivities” aside, perhaps you’d like to favor your readers with some sort of link to what the bloggers are talking about?

So they can – y’know – make up their own minds?

That’s quite a change from when the Republican Party was trying to use same-sex marriage and gay adoption as wedge issues. It seems like just yesterday that the GOP caucus in St. Paul was trying to put the gay marriage issue on the ballot to gin up voter turnout

I’m a conservative, and I have been for decades.  Among my beliefs – marriage is a guy and girl thing.  And also fraught, but I digress.  I oppose gay marriage.

And yet, 20 years ago, I got involved in a gay bashing incident.   If you take Stool’s puerile stereotype seriously, you’ll know how I reacted – by piling on and helping beat the crap out of the gay guy.

But wait!  I didn’t!  I got involved on the side of the gay guy, the victim of the incident.

How could that be?  Doesn’t that go completely against the stereotype?  On what basis can someone like Mr. Stool judge me, if not by stereotype?

Y’see, Cuck, that’d be the difference between Republicans and Democrats; while many conservatives have sincere beliefs about what marriage is, we still stand up for the dignity of the individuals.   

 and that überconservative pinup girl Ann Coulter was calling a Democratic presidential candidate a “faggot.”

And you’ll recall – and you’ll have to recall, because Stoolster won’t tell you – that it was conservative bloggers that cut Coulter the loosest the fastest.  This blog included.

If Ann Coulter didn’t exist, the lefty media would have to create her. 

Indeed, as Cuck has shown in this piece, the do.  Over and over again.

Since these bloggers are now courageous champions for civil rights for gays and lesbians, it won’t be long before they call on Sen. Norm Coleman to repudiate his vote for a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and to support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and hate-crimes legislation.

Uh, you see, Stool, there again you miss the point.  Standing against character assassination of gays (to say nothing of violence) isn’t the same as debasing the definition of marriage (many conservatives, myself included, support civil union legislation while wanting to defend traditional marriage); hate-crimes legislation is broadly stupid, and deserves to be opposed by anyone who believes in genuine civil liberty. 

It wouldn’t be a Cucking Stool post without a dumb snark – the too-frequent tack of the dim left,  the unintentional irony of slamming bigotry by employing it.

Wait for it…

Wait…for…it…

They’ve seen the progressive light. I mean, that has to be it. The only other explanation would be craven hypocrisy, and that certainly couldn’t be the case.

Numbnuts!  If you can’t see the difference between defending traditional marriage and defending people against scabrous character assassination, then you shouldn’t be using terms like “craven hypocrisy”.  You might hurt yourself.

UPDATE:  My bad.  This piece of logically-retarded, snarky, moronic bilge wasn’t written by Cucking Stool.  It was written by Tim O’Brien of the Strib.  Y’know – the paper where the editors and gatekeepers are supposed to help make sure the content isn’t, y’know, puerile and dim.

My apologies to Mr Stool.

What is it that separates a “journalist” from a polemicist?

Willpower.

Oh, journalism professors and editors and people who regard journalism as a high, monastic calling will quibble with that – and justifiably so.  But at the end of the day, the only thing that really separates “journalism” from agenda-driven polemicism is the will, on someone’s part, to make it so; to tell the “who, what, when, where, why and how” of a story, and to either leave the “becauses” out of the story, or balance all of the applicable “becauses” and let the consumer make up their own mind.

Me?  I’m a polemicist.  I worked as a reporter – radio and freelance print news – off and on for a decade and a half, mostly off.  I worked hard to keep my personal views of the things I covered out of my reporting – not that there was much personal opinion to add to most of it (I covered business news for one St. Paul weekly, crime for another, Arts and Entertainment for yet another).  But I’ll be honest; I’m here with an agenda, and a predefined set of good guys and not-so-good guys (and a big set of genuine bad guys).  Oh, I do try to be fair, as far as it goes; indeed, I am demonstrably fair in my treatment of disagreement.  But I leave you no doubt as to where I’m coming from.

Now, I’ve “known” Jeff Fecke from Blog Of The Moderate Left (BlOTMoL) for years; he’s been blogging almost as long as I have.  I have talked a certain amount of smack at Jeff over the years – partly because he’s tried to emulate the John Stewart-Via-Atrios model of leftyblogging (reduce all news and opinion to its’ lowest snarky denominator)…

…and partly because last fall he joined “Minnesota Monitor” as a paid “reporter”.  MinMon is, as noted elsewhere in this blog, a lefty group-blog supported by “liberals with deep pockets”; the group that cuts their checks, the “Center for Independent Media”, used to share office space with George Soros’ “Media Matters for America”; they’ve since moved.  Last year, they started organizing and paying regional leftybloggers.  When queried – repeatedly – about this relationship, MinMon’s “staff” respond with a giggle, a snark, and a change of subject. 

But whatever.

Fecke, in his capacity as a “reporter” for the MinMon, attended Tuesday night’s “Town Hall” meeting with MN 2nd District Congressman John Kline.  I wrote a compendium of the various livebloggers’ accounts yesterday. 

The big “story”, of course, was Fecke’s claim in MnMon (reiterated by “editor” Robin “Rew” Marty) that Kline’s staff had barred him from liveblogging – but allowed a group of conservative bloggers to blog away unhindered.  He wrote “Minnesota Monitor had intended to liveblog the event.  Unfortunately, while some conservative bloggers were allowed internet access, Kline staffers informed this reporter that I would not be able to take advantage of internet access that had been offered me after inquiry with the Lakeville school district.”

Several conservative bloggers attacked this claim (here and here, for starters); sources with familiarity with the Congressman’s staff’s decisions indicate that Fecke’s claim is baseless; Michael Brodkorb scanned and posted the forum’s rules.  There remains no actual evidence of any double standard.

So at the very least, the question “Was Jeff Fecke the victim of conservative perfidy” is up in the air. 

Although not to him:

Now, if you’re coming her from the conservative blogosphere, you’re probably expecting that I’m going to be arguing vehemently about the decision by the Kline camp not to let me liveblog. 

 Actually, no.  We were expecting that you’d be calling the Kline “camp’s” decision an anti-left, anti-media double-standard in the first place. 

But to argue that I was at fault because the Kline camp wouldn’t let me use equipment I’d already secured? 

I’m wondering precisely where the hangup is, here:

1. The event was held in a Lakeville School  school building.
2. Jeff had, by his own account, asked the school for access to the WiFi.  Fecke said it himself:  “Unfortunately, while some conservative bloggers were allowed internet access, Kline staffers informed this reporter that I would not be able to take advantage of internet access that had been offered me after inquiry with the Lakeville school district“.
3. According to Kevin Ecker and Michael Brodkorb, though, the school’s wi-fi was turned off.  Ecker: “I spoke with several members of the Kline staff and it was never related that there would be no liveblogging. Just that while the school had wifi, it wasn’t turned on. And I verified this with my laptop….which I had out, open and turned on”. 
4. If Fecke has some information indicating that Congressman Kline’s staff had some means for turning on the Lakeville schools’ wifi equipment, to disenfranchise bloggers critical of him (but not, apparently, those who support him), then perhaps we should see it.

So unless Fecke has some evidence that the “Kline Camp” had actually tried to freeze out critical coverage, perhaps as a “reporter” he’d be well-advised to put up the evidence or quit crying conspiracy and discrimination.

Y’know – the sort of thing “journalists” (as opposed to people who carry notebooks and play dress-up and talk reporter talk) are supposed to do.

Of course, Minnesota Monitor has a dog in the race; despite affecting the window-dressing of a “serious” journalistic venture, there’s no real doubt that their “coverage” is biased hard to the left. 

Look – be a bomb-tossing polemicist.  Or be a “journalist”.  Or be a journalist who is honest about being a bomb-tosser.  Just don’t pretend.

Like when one says things like…:

The Kline camp went into this meeting terrified of…something.  I’m not sure what. 

Then why mention it?  Because nothing about Kline’s appearance seemed to bespeak “terror” in any sense that I’ve been able to recognize. 

If you, Jeff Fecke, have some insight into the “terror” that lurks in the mind of John Kline – combat veteran, former bearer of the nuclear football, career Marine officer, long-time successful congressional representative – then “I’m not sure what” hardly suffices.  Favor us with the evidence, the insight, the FACTS, before you go playing at being both clairvoyant and journalist. 

 And I think it was a huge strategic blunder.  But they were scared to death of something happening that would make John Kline look bad, and they took pains to ensure that the meeting would be as tightly controlled as possible.

One wonders if Jeff Fecke has ever “covered” any sort of political event in his life.

Jeff – all politicians, and their staffs, control their messages (if their staffs are worth anything). 

Kline could’ve scored some points had he been less fearful of anyone finding out that he talked to the unwashed masses.  Instead, the story that ran on the networks was that Kline was afraid of the unwashed masses.

Because Kline knows that the mainstream media will treat him only vaguely less-badly than the leftyblogosphere will.  The media he needs – conservative bloggers, talk radio – was there, getting the message he needs, out. 

Jeff signs off with a snark that shows, in its way, how badly-suited for this sort of thing Fecke would seem to be:

And don’t worry, righties: I’ll make sure Mr. Soros buys me a Blackberry for the next one.

Note to Jeff – and, indeed, the whole MnMonitor community; your response to the whole “Soros funds you guys” question has scuppered whatever credibility you seemed to be seeking, initially, with anyone who pays attention to these things (which, to be fair, might not include your audience).  You never answered any of the many, legitimate questions about where the Center for “Independent” Media was getting its money with anything more than a giggle and a snark and a “nothing to see here, nosirreebob” (except for the one of you who finally admitted that “liberals with deep pockets” were keeping you guys in the chips). 

This is where you pay for it!

In the fall of 1981, I took Journalism 101. The teacher – Jim Smorada, then the editor of the Jamestown Sun – was a great reporter and a great teacher.

And while my “career” as a “journalist” was short, underpaid and undistinguished, I can honestly say that I held true to almost everything Mr. Smorada taught me…

…including, perhaps most importantly of all, his imprecation to never, never, ever refer to myself as “this reporter“. Of this, I am modestly proud.

That is all.

(more…)

An array of Minnesota bloggers, left and right, covered Congressman John Kline’s town hall meeting last night. 

The Twin Cities’ fringe left, convinced that Kline was shunning his constituents (because his office didn’t kowtow to the demands of a group of stalkers “demonstrators” who conducted several de facto sit-ins at his office), showed up in force.  Some of the best of the Twin Cities’ conservative blog community showed up to keep an eye on the “demonstrators” (and, as it happens, the leftybloggers).

Joe Tucci of Kool Aid Report was there, and provided the first report I saw of the evening’s tempest in a teapot:

740 – Gold star Mom just [smacked down the assembled lefties]. Half the place gave here a standing O. Half did not. Guess which half sat on their asses. Watch for the footage (and why the assholes patriotic Americans that didn’t stand, didn’t applaud her son are dregs) on residual froces tomorrow.

…

815 – LIBERAL LIES!!!! Minnesota Monitor monitor sez:

Reporter [heh -ed.] Jeff Fecke has called in from the town hall meeting sponsored by Rep. John Kline (R – Minn.). Although wifi access has been enabled, [lie – it has not been enabled – we checked. -ed.] Kline’s staff has asked that there be no live blogging of the event.He asked no such thing. They merely said that the school’s wifi was off. Fecke playing loose with facts? Like that never happens.He asked no such thing. They merely said that the school’s wifi was off. Fecke playing loose with facts? Like that never happens.He asked no such thing. They merely said that the school’s wifi was off. Fecke playing loose with facts? Like that never happens.He asked no such thing. They merely said that the school’s wifi was off. Fecke playing loose with facts? Like that never happens.

He asked no such thing. They merely said that the school’s wifi was off. Fecke playing loose with facts? Like that never happens.

Curious, I ran over to Minnesota Monitor (a regional rent-a-blog supported by the Washington-based “Center for Independent Media”, which used to share office space with George Soros’ “Media Matters for America”, but which denies any connection or funding from Soros, even though I’m not aware that the group has ever responded to any questions about its funding with anything but a giggle and a change of subject) to see what the fuss was about. 

MinMon’s rent-a-blogger Jeff Fecke, who wrote an otherwise fairly dispassionate account of the event, had this to say about the purported “restrictions”:

Minnesota Monitor had intended to liveblog the event.  Unfortunately, while some conservative bloggers were allowed internet access, Kline staffers informed this reporter that I would not be able to take advantage of internet access that had been offered me after inquiry with the Lakeville school district.

The Kline camp also declined to let news media hook into the auditorium audio feed, and did not allow anyone in to set up until ten minutes before the meeting was to start.

Michael Brodkorb responded by posting the rules for the event, that WiFi was not at the moment available, and that he…:

…walked into the auditorium, found a place to sit and used my Verizon Wireless Air-Card to access the Internet.  It is was not the responsibility of Lakeville South High School (the taxpayers) or Congressman Kline’s office (the taxpayers) to provide me with access to the Internet…

To prevent being scooped on future live-blogging events, I would suggest liberal bloggers buy air-cards, rather than creating conspiracy theories that  “somce conservative bloggers were allowed internet access”

And Kevin Ecker clarified:

I spoke with several members of the Kline staff and it was never related that there would be no liveblogging. Just that while the school had wifi, it wasn’t turned on. And I verified this with my laptop….which I had out, open and turned on. Plus both Joe Tucci and MDE were liveblogging next to me. Nobody questioned it. 

 Which introduces the question; when will the “journalists” – as the MinMon people claim to be – either:

• reveal the source that told them that live-blogging was “prohibited”
• elaborate on their claim of discrimination (“…some conservative bloggers were allowed…Kline staffers informed this reporter that I would not be able to take advantage of internet“)
• Admit that they cried “wolf” when they should have cried “we didn’t do our technical homework”

Note to the MinMon kids from someone who’s actually worked for a [bad] living as a reporter; nobody is required to kiss your ass just because you show up at an event claiming to be a reporter.  Getting let into events late and being barred from PA system feeds is hardly unusual, and rarely political, and never an impediment to covering a story.

And a separate note from someone who has worked for a [equally bad] living as a broadcast producer, covering news, sports and special events; your failure to have a backup plan for a technical hitch doesn’t constitute a “conspiracy”.  When you are trying to cover an event and you are relying on any form of technology to help get the story out, you must always assume that the technology will fail, and have a back-up plan.  Michael Brodkorb had a technical workaround – his Verizon card.  Other conservative bloggers took their notes and waited until after the event to upload and publish; good enough is good enough!

Grow up.

After complaining about being repressed by the injustice inherent in the system, Fecke reported that the crowd – on both sides – seemed fairly restrained and civil.   

Kevin Ecker of Eckernet was also there, and had a slightly different take:

Several moments stuck out, some of them in retrospect, some of them I know even before were going to be memorable. One in particular was when a woman got to speak and started by saying she was a Gold Star Mother. I couldn’t help but wonder how many of these hippies knew the difference between a “Gold Star” mother and a “Blue Star” mother. So I knew where this was going and wow, she hit the ball out of the park with her speech, and when she was done quite a few people got up to applaud the sacrificies of her and her son. Not the lefties of course, they just sat there sulking.

Retired Lt. Col. Joe Repya…called out the lefties in the audience, declaring that they should be ashamed of themselves for not standing up and applauding for a Gold Star Mother and her deceased son.

More from Ecker, who opined…:

Somewhere in there [a woman who was a detractor of Kline’s] objected to being called unpatriotic (nobody called her that…it’s liberal talking points), and then called Kline dispicable. Kline waited until she was done and said he understood why she was upset if her patriotism was questioned, but that he also gets upset when he is called dispicable.

Fair?  Balanced?  You be the judge.

The Lady Logician from Ladies’ Logic was there, and promises both photos and a longer post.  But she notes:

Both sides were fairly equally represented. The town hall meeting was open to ALL issues so we did get a couple of intelligent questions about issues other than Iraq, but we all knew why the majority was there and the questions reflected it.We heard from the usual suspects on the left but we also got to hear from a Gold Star Mom (Merrilee Carlson) and from Powerlines Sgt Thole from Chaska. Sgt. Thole’s rep read from his 3/17 Star Tribune editorial and informed Congressman Kline that they were going to present his office first with the Appeal for Courage Petition (if you are active duty you need to check the site out).

Stay tuned; I have a hunch this is just getting rolling.  

And thanks, and good job, to Joe Tucci, Kevin Ecker, Lady Logician, Andy Aplikowski, and even Jeff Fecke.  I mean, I’d be wrong not to thank a guy for serving up a high, down-the-middle ‘tater like that…

If you come to a Minnesota Organization of Bloggers (MOB) party (of which one is shortly due!), you almost feel like you’ve stepped into a Mob party; you hardly ever hear a real name.  Fishsticks, Bogus, Elder, Saint, Rocket, Flash, Swiftee, Swede, Wingman, Trunk, Atomizer, Foot, Dementee, Triple-A – almost everyone seems like they have a nickname.  In many cases, I don’t know the name behind the nickname.

For example, I have been reading Kool Aid Report for almost three years now, nearly every day – and it wasn’t until today that I had a real name to associate with Learned Foot.

It’s almost strange – especially given that I’m one of the few MOB bloggers who has never used a nickname or pseudonym.

Well, as far as you know, anyway.

Because  I’m thinking he’s in big trouble:

A Scottish company has been slammed for inviting customers to “send a poo” to an Englishman on St George’s Day.

Edinburgh-based firm PostaPoo.com is selling plastic “realistic poo” to send to “your favourite (or least favourite) Englishman” to mark April 23.

Customers are given the choice between human or dog-style excrement, wrapped in tissue paper along with a personal message set beside the English flag.

Some people can’t take a joke:

But members of the English Democrats Party, which is campaigning for an English Parliament, questioned the stunt’s legality.

Robin Tilbrook, the party’s national chairman, said: “The company’s website says they will not send this so-called ‘practical joke’ if the message is deemed threatening, racist, homophobic, or displays religious bigotry.

“It appears to me to be threatening, possibly racist and without question bigoted. It’s certainly offensive and possibly an offence.”

Racist?  Hoo-boy.
Anyway, let’s check.

Yep.  Still there.  Whew.

Leftyblog “Needlenose” wrote about Arkanasas Democrat Mark Pryor’s dim-bulb “Double-dog secret withdrawal date” (secrecy guaranteed because, y’know, we’re only going to tell Congress and the Iraqi Government) – the same one I wrote about earlier.

The Nose’s comment:

 Sen. Pryor, here’s a secret for you: The “enemy” is already biding their time and waiting for us to leave, save for those who are already providing chaos and mayhem.

Further proof, were any needed, that Democrats are not to be trusted with the keys to the family car.

Listen up, Nose:   There’s a huge difference between “biding your time” and “waiting” for us to leave when there’s not only a chance of having a helicopter send hollow-charge wake-up call through your window in the middle of the night, or bounce your rubble with a JDAM from the middle of nowhere, or have a squad of Marines barging through your door at some un-allah-ly hour, but even more so when there’s no end in sight.    When you wake up knowing today could be your last, and that terrorists don’t usually get to rotate home after a year, and that every morning is going to be the same, and the stress of knowing it’s not going to change until you are dead (an ongoing stress that eventually wears down even the most fanatical fighter, causing the kind of mistakes that land those virgins)…

…as opposed to knowing that if you can just hang on, hold out, keep your head low until the Labor Day weekend in a year and a half. Or, better yet, waking up in a country, or province, where the government is entirely sympathetic to you, where you can walk down to the market for some babaganouj and pide and use the phone and sit at a sidewalk cafe table with the guy who’s making your fake documents, and not worry that an SAS team is going to be mounting your head on a wall if you don’t watch your back.

Sort of like Afghanistan, and Iraq, both were.

The galling part, of course, is that the Dems – the ones making all the noise, anyway – don’t believe that’s a problem.  Or don’t know any better.

I don’t know what’s worse.

Learned Foot beats the Minnesota Money Monitor – a local lefty rentablog that used to share quarters with George Soros’ “Media Matters for America”, but has no connection with ’em, nosirreebob, and which responds to all criticism or questioning by either a) giggling and changing the subject or b) calling their attacker a “hack” and giggling and changing the subject – like Mohammed Ali beating Joe Bugner.

Read it and weep for the local lefty rentablog community.

Your “master of obscure sports references” title is under serious attack.

Now is no time to rest on your laurels.

My suggestion:  less Everton, more Buzkashi.

Have your people call my people.

Katie, from “Yucky Salad With Bones”:

I have always approached pork touching with what I’d like to believe is admirable bravery.

No, you’ll need to read it.

Go to read Cathy’s account of her battle with cancer over at Cake Eater Chronicles.

Stated, in this case, in the form of a Battlestar Galactica story:

In my dream, Chief told me, in a very sympathetic way, that he was really sorry, but I was now obsolete and that it simply wasn’t worth it to the fleet to fix me. He walked away, shaking his head, and rejoined Callie (who annoys me to no end) who was shooting me sympathetic glances. I laid there, on a gurney, in the middle of the hanger, the funky lighting doing absolutely nothing for my already pale complexion, and I was stunned. I thought I was worth repairing. I thought Chief would think so, too, as he’s generally a pretty sympathetic guy when it comes to broken stuff. Alas, this was not the case. Then I woke up. In a sweat, but that’s another story entirely.

You could perhaps see where I would draw the conclusion that confession is good for the soul from that, eh?

Then send whatever form of Best Wishes your world view calls for.

(Via Chad)

Headline yesterday: “There’s only one Andy Johnson”

Robin “Rew” Marty answers my questions about Andy Birkey’s piece on last week’s vandalism of a “Soulforce Q” bus in Iowa…

…well, no. That’s not true. Robin – a high double-dog poobah at “Minnesota Monitor”, the local rentablog that swears it’s never gotten a nickel from George Soros, but has released no financials that I’m aware of – doesn’t “answer” the questions in the sense of “resolving ambiguities” or “filling in logical gaps”.

No, perhaps Robin – who is no dummy – giggles and smirks and avoids actually bothering with any of that “clarifying opacity” stuff that journalists are supposed to fuss over. Perhaps it’s in solidarity with most other leftybloggers; “nobody gives an intelligent answer until everyone can give an intelligent answer”.

In any case – we got nothin’ here:

So it’s Springtime, and young men’s fancy turns to thoughts of love, yadda yadda yadda…

I can only assume that’s what’s going on here, since Mitch has obviously developed a crush on me. He can barely make it a week without pulling my braids or stealing my lunch box or some sign that proves his underlying devotion to me.

Tee hee, but the only thing my heart turns to is Flash’s kegerator.

She claims that I do…

… a cute little insinuation that Andy Birkey has a disclosure he’s not disclosing:

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.

Obviously not taking the time to see that Andy’s been covering Soulforce since October of 2006, he just assumes Andy’s making some sort of push in his own interest. I guess Mitch’s crush on me is more recent than I knew.

And that’d make two of us, but again, irrelevant.

No, I didn’t know that Andy Birkey’s been covering “Soulforce” for six months. In fact, I doubt most readers who happened onto the site would know it, or have the faintest idea about it. Nor, if you believe that journalism should be clear, should they have to. You don’t want your readers to have to dig great swathes of context out of your stories.
No, I was insinuating nothing. Read my original piece; I wondered why key elements of the story were left out, and from where Birkey drew his bout of clairvoyance?

The worst part is, he is still claiming that we must be part of Media Matters since we share offices with them, even though the Center moved offices a few months ago. I hope he hasn’t been sending me poetry to the DC office, since I’m not sure how long they forward the mail.

Aw, shucks. But again, the Minnesota Monitor’s parent organization – the one that paid rentabloggers like Marty and Jeff Fecke throughout the campaign and (presumably, though I could be wrong) still does, did share offices with Media Matters for quite some time. And try as I may (and I have), I can find no financial disclosures of any kind from that organization.

So Robin can giggle and smirk all she wants – and, indeed, she does…:

But his little spitballs and stickers on the back of my shirt are noticed and appreciated, and seen for what they truly are – an obviously smitten admirer.

Don’t worry Mitch, I’ll see you at the garage soon, and you can bring me the flowers.

…but the questions remain:

• Why didn’t Andy Birkey tell the entire story?  The fact that Dordt college cleaned the vans up with their own maintenance staff?  Would that have upset the “baaaad Christians vandalized us” narrative too badly?
• How does Minnesota Monitor’s “Pledge” square with that shortcoming?
• And, as re Minnesota Monitor, where does that money come from, anyway?  You guys yap endlessly about Michael Brodkorb being a “paid GOP operative”, even though he discloses his income fully and promptly.  Why won’t MNMon and the Center for Independent Media do this?

And love is best saved for those that are worthy. Like a fresh new M1911A1 or a Gibson Les Paul.

Sorry. But we can be friends!

The mysterious anonymous blogger I want to find out would be Feisty Republican Whore, who claims to be a right-leaning sex-trade worker in the Twin Cities.

Some of the writing just screams “guy”, but it’s hard to place.

But it is a good, clever, and frequent/long-term blog.

She (?) never responded to the invite to the last MOB party. Maybe next time…

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.

Blois Olson’s suit against Michael Brodkorb has been tossed on a summary judgement. 

And the leftybloggers who last year hopped about and screeched like poo-flinging howler monkeys at the notion that their arch-nemesis was getting his comeuppance?

As this is written?

[crickets]

[more crickets]

[female crickets]

[snarky crickets who need new material]

[rich crickets with Hungarian accents]

Oh, it’s not complete silence.  Over at Norwegianity (the left’s one-stop shop for calm reasoning), MNob – a lawyer – has the goods.  Or some goods.  (And has them with immense speed.  An emailer offline asks us to “note the speed with which [MNob] obtained the order.  You can’t get court docs over the internet – you have to go down to the courthouse to obtain them.  Meaning either MNob is an obsessed stalker of Brodkorb’s, or she has someone in the Dakota County court clerks office.  I’m betting on both.”

MNob writes:

[Brodkorb’s motion to dismiss] was granted primarily because Blois Olson stipulated that he (Olson) was a limited-purpose public figure. (Par. 2) As a public figure, under the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan, Olson would have had to prove on this summary judgment motion that there is some admissible evidence that Brodkorb acted with actual malice. (Id.) The court found that Olson hadn’t done so. That is, Olson can’t prove that Brodkorb knew the statements to false at the time Brodkorb made them.

Now, I’m no lawyer, but I’ve spent a bit of time in court.  I’ve also worked as a journalist, so I’ve had a bit of experience learning how defamation cases work. 

As I understand it – lawyers, please help me out here – but a summary judgement generally only happens if a judge finds that a case is so utterly devoid of merit that it’d be a waste of the court’s time to pursue it at all.  The rule of summary judgements, in fact, is “There is no genuine issue of material fact, and the movant is entitled judgment as a matter of law.”  In other words, Olson brought no game, and the judge put the entire case out of its misery.

So – again, in my own deeply imperfect understanding of civil procedure – it’s not that Olson didn’t quiiiiiiite git ‘er done; it’s that nothing in any of his original filings convinced the judge that the case had even a smidgen of merit.   

 Nor could Olson prove that Brodkorb made a false statement with “reckless disregard” or with “serious doubts” as to its truth or falsity. Olson simply couldn’t reach the standard of proof for public figure defamation, something that is very difficult under the Sullivan standard.

True – public figures have a harder time of things in defamation cases.  But again, MNob’s paragraph implies that there was a “day in court”, where Olson (or his attorneys) tried, and failed, to make the charge stick.  No.  It was a summary judgement; the judge ruled that there were no material facts at all, absolutely nothing that would justify having the case heard in court.

Nothing.

Nada.

The court determined that the efforts Brodkorb made were sufficient to shield him: “Defendant did enough” to investigate the statements. (Par. 7)

That’s all Brodkorb did: “Enough.”

MNob recites this as if it damns Brodkorb in any way. 

The Colts “did enough” to beat the Bears in the Super Bowl.  There’s no quibbling about how much is “enough” – it’s an emotionless, non-shaded, black and white threshold.

The judge ruled that, since Olson is public enough, the evidence supporting his defamation case was of  so little merit, under the laws governing these things (as opposed to the outrage of offended leftybloggers, or their impassioned yearning for justice) that it didn’t deserve to be heard in court.

MNob’s entire argument, essentially, is “the dog ate Blois’ homework!”.

We can expect Brodkorb to trumpet this very loudly, but given the fact that virtually ALL the evidence is not only subject to a protective order of the court, but an “Attorney’s Eyes Only” protective order, even he doesn’t know all of the evidence that was considered by the court. Nor does Blois Olson.

That is, indeed, possible.

And again, I’m no lawyer.  But as I understand things, if the judge issued a summary judgement dismissing the case, and yet there was plenty of material fact that might have justified a trial, that’d be a reversible error that’d justify an appeal – something lower-court judges really don’t like.  So I’m guessing – again, in my capacity as a goy whose legal experience is representing himself, once (and successfully) – that the judge has a pretty solid reason for doing the legal equivalent of tossing the case in the circular file.
MNob:

Nonetheless, it’s pretty obvious that Brodkorb’s sources are the focus of the protective order, and the fact that he had several sources for the information came into play in the court’s decision. What’s fascinating here is that Brodkorb seeks to claim the protections that any journalist in Minnesota gets in being able to protect sources (“Hey — two different dudes told me”), and be free of liability for defamation when he adheres to the bare minimum of journalistic standards. But in posting things to his “personal blog,” he prints things that no journalist with an ounce of ethics would go near (unless they were quoting Brodkorb himself as some sort of credible source on issues of, say, gastrointestinal diseases).

 Maybe, maybe not, but this is an utterly subjective judgement (“Is Brodkorb a good journalist?” – I’d say generally “yes”, leftybloggers will get kicked out of the club if they don’t chant “Tool Tool Tool Tool Tool” in rigid unison), that has nothing whatever to do with the demise of Blois Olson’s case.

MNob again:

It’s also important to point out that truth is always a defense in a defamation claim and that this court did not make a determination as to the truth or falsity of what Brodkorb said (Par. 8).

“Honest, everyone – the fish I caught was thiiiiiiiiis biiiiiiiiig!”

The reason the court did not make a determination was because there were no material facts justifying a trial!  At all! 

 Rather, the court’s focus was on whether he said what he said with “reckless disregard.” That’s hardly a high standard – that the statements might have been utterly false, but Brodkorb did not know that when he said so.

The standard is what it is – but the fact is that the judge ruled that Blois Olson didn’t come close to showing anything like reckless disregard for the truth.   

What does all this mean in the long run? Pick only on public figures? Pick on people who might not be public figures, but whose ego makes them stipulate to being limited purpose public figures? Only run with untruths that two different dudes said were true?

You mean like that whole “Minnesota Democrats Exposed is a paid GOP operation” bit?

No.  What it means is “grow up”, and stop assuming the law means what you want it to, just because you reeeeeeeeeeeeeeallly want it to. 

Learned Foot – an attorney himself – writes:

 1) Blois Olson’s defamation suit against MDE has been thrown out on summary judgment.

2) That’s why Flash, MNPooplius, MNMonitor et al haven’t posted anything yet today.

3) Never go to a blog run by a labor radical from Iowa for insightful legal analysis. Or any legal analysis for that matter.

I’m not a lawyer or anything, but…

(Disclosure:  I’ve known Blois Olson for years.  I disagree with him, natch – but I harbor absolutely no animus toward him at all.  Of course, Brodkorb is a fellow NARN co-host).

WordPress lost about 5/6 of my latest installment of “Losing My (State) Religion”. 

Grrr, I say.

Lil’ Ollie Willis, who wouldn’t know a deep, unreported truth if it came to the surface and announced itself directly to his face, thinks he’s clairvoyant:

The big, deep unreported truth about Ann Coulters comments at CPAC is this: conservatives agree with her. They do believe that “faggot” is an acceptable term, both for gays and political opponents.

Hm. Do we?

[John McCain] denounced her remarks on Saturday morning. “The comments were wildly inappropriate,” said his spokesman, Brian Jones.

Mr. Giuliani said, “The comments were completely inappropriate and there should be no place for such name-calling in political debate.”

Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Mr. Romney, said: “It was an offensive remark. Governor Romney believes all people should be treated with dignity and respect.”

What, you mean conservative bloggers?

Like this one?

[McCain]can point to the Coulter remark as an excuse for bypassing CPAC by calling it an extremist venue that he was correct to avoid. It’s not true — most of the CPAC attendees abhorred Coulter’s remark when informed of it

Or here?

Question #2, if too obscure, is “Don’t you think Ann Coulter is typical of all conservatives?” Since every single conservative blogger I have seen this morning has roundly condemned her as well as most going so far as to believe she should never be invited to a respectable political gathering again, any broad brush painting done by liberals can easily be dismissed for what it is; rank stupidity.

Or her?

With a single word, Coulter sullied the hard work of hundreds of CPAC participants and exhibitors and tarred the collective reputation of thousands of CPAC attendees. At a reception for college students held by the Young America’s Foundation, I lambasted the substitution of stupid slurs for persuasion– be it “faggot” from a conservative or “gook” from a liberal–and urged the young people there to conduct themselves at all times with dignity in their ideological battles on and off campus.

Don’t see much approval there.

Where is the approval, Ollie? I know – you’re used to writing to the left-wing fever swamp, where all you need is to declare something for it to be so.

So where were you, Ollie, on Amanda Marcotte’s corrosive, anti-Christian bigotry?

Oh, yeah – you didn’t give a jiggly giggle about it.

Working for George Soros means never having to think real hard.