People sometimes ask me “Mitch, how does the “Fairness Doctrine” work?”

And I respond “Very badly, if real-life experience counts for anything”.

While the notional idea behind the doctrine is to force “balance” in programming, it really works one of two ways:

• As it did with about 90% of talk stations before 1987 – by eschewing political or remotely controversial talk, or…
• …as in the example linked above, mixing conservative and liberal programming. Which fails because the liberal programming (as well as some of the conservative shows in the example above) is pretty dreadful, unmarketable stuff.

And that’s not even the worst news: the doctrine will likely put a damper on all alternative media, including this blog.

There’s a huge concern among conservative talk radio hosts that reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine would all-but destroy the industry due to equal time constraints. But speech limits might not stop at radio. They could even be extended to include the Internet and “government dictating content policy.”

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell raised that as a possibility after talking with bloggers at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. McDowell spoke about a recent FCC vote to bar Comcast from engaging in certain Internet practices – expanding the federal agency’s oversight of Internet networks.
The commissioner, a 2006 President Bush appointee, told the Business & Media Institute the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned. McDowell, who was against reprimanding Comcast, said the net neutrality effort could win the support of “a few isolated conservatives” who may not fully realize the long-term effects of government regulation.

They’re going to have to smart up mighty fast.

“I think the fear is that somehow large corporations will censor their content, their points of view, right,” McDowell said. “I think the bigger concern for them should be if you have government dictating content policy, which by the way would have a big First Amendment problem.”

“Then, whoever is in charge of government is going to determine what is fair, under a so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ which won’t be called that – it’ll be called something else,” McDowell said. “So, will Web sites, will bloggers have to give equal time or equal space on their Web site to opposing views rather than letting the marketplace of ideas determine that?”

On the one hand, it sounds stretchy. On the other hand, liberals have been unable to make the faintest dent in talk radio, and their strength on blogs is largely on hive sites heavily supported by the likes of George Soros and his various sockpuppet non-profits; surely they would like to save a buck or two and have government, especially an Obama government heavily in their debt, to “level the playing field” for them.

“The Fairness Doctrine has not been raised at the FCC, but the importance of this election is in part – has something to do with that,” McDowell said. “So you know, this election, if it goes one way, we could see a re-imposition of the Fairness Doctrine. There is a discussion of it in Congress. I think it won’t be called the Fairness Doctrine by folks who are promoting it. I think it will be called something else and I think it’ll be intertwined into the net neutrality debate.”

The other “rationales” for the “Fairness” Doctrine – scarcity of media (in a world where it takes two minutes to start a blog, and digital radio is about to explode the number of frequencies available), corporate censorship of liberal views (which explains why a black maria came for Keith Olberman and why Bill Maher is breaking rocks on a chain gang in Mississippi) and public interest (in a world where media of all types are orders of magnitude more ubiquitous than they were 21 years ago) – don’t stand up to even silly scrutiny.

So I guess the order of business is to figure out which leftybloggers I have to add to the staff to balance out Roosh and I.

Given the quality of leftyblog writing in this town, I’ll probably have to make it like five or six of ’em.

Taking a look ahead to the State Fair – which, along with being one of Minnesota’s great family traditions, is also the beginning of the political home stretch in this state – Tom from Saint Paul writes about a pitfall you might not be aware of:

Thought you would enjoy those donuts at the State Fair?  Think again!  You may really be setting yourself up for a bad case of indigestion about 4 months later when those DFLers you just supported start raising your taxes.

There is a mini-donut stand someplace in the vicinity of the grandstand at the Minnesota State Fair.  It is run by the Tenth Ward & Rural Ramsey DFL Donut Booth.

The contributions to various political units from this DFL money maker were:
2007 – $40,000
2006 – $45,000
2005 – $49,700

On the upside – they’re dropping. 

I think they could stand  to drop a lot more, obviously.

There is nothing to indicate this is a DFL runned/sponsored/supporting stand or that your “contribution” is going to support DFL candidates.  Many people buy donuts here thinking they are just getting donuts.  What they are really getting is the heartburn of money being used to support DFL candidates.  This money is going to districts that are beating Republicans by close margins.  It is also going to districts that turn around and donate their money to tightly fought districts.   

Ironically, the DFLers call the income on the donuts “contributions”.   People unwittingly buying those donuts might use another term to describe the DFLers income.

Mini-donuts are pretty much all trans-fat anyway, right?

Anyway – if you gotta have the mini-donuts (I never eat ’em; they take away precious room needed for the International Market’s luscious Vietnamese egg rolls and Cynthia’s Italian Sausage), steer clear of the grandstand.

I’ll be back to remind you later…

Jay Reding sums up the Georgia War pretty capably:

Putin wants to ensure that Russia, and not those upstart republics to its southwest, gets the benefit of supplying most of Europe’s natural gas. The Georgian crisis was draped with the idea that Russia had to protect South Ossetia, but the truth of the matter is that these last few days have been about nothing but realpolitik. Putin and Medvedev are trying to get money and power—and that is all too easy when the Russian Army can act as private enforcers.

President Saakashvili made a crucial mistake in provoking the Russians over Ossetia, although it’s not clear how much the Georgians were themselves provoked by Ossetian agents working at the behest of the Kremlin. The Georgian Army can’t match the strength of the Russian Army, and the United States was not about to get themselves involved in any conflict between the two. The Georgians unleashed something they could not control, which in war can be fatal.

Russia has been invaded time and time again over the last thousand years – and their societal collective memory does go back that far.

It’s given them both a sense of paranoia about bordering powers, and a sense of entitlement – reinforced by seventy years of superpower status – about their means to deal with that paranoia.

History really didn’t end in 1991. it turns out.

I was reading a summary of a journal belonging to Hideki Tojo, one of Japan’s World War II era Prime Ministers, that described his disposition just after the incineration of Japan’s Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Tojo, executed in 1948 after being convicted of war crimes by the Allies, was prime minister during much of the war. The notes buttress other evidence that Tojo was fiercely opposed to surrender despite the hopelessness of Japan’s war effort.

The stridency of the writings is remarkable considering they were penned just days after the U.S. atomic bombs incinerated Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing some 200,000 people and posing the threat of the complete destruction of Japan. At the time, Japan had begun arming children, women and the elderly with bamboo spears, in addition to the aircraft and other forces it had marshaled, to defend the homeland against a ground invasion.

The mindset of the times and of this man seem to express a level of nationalism and kamikaze pride too extreme to exist today. To think that a nation would preemptively attack another to gain ground or extinguish another people is nearly unthinkable in this day and age.

Fifty years seems like a long time, especially for me, one generation removed. Names like Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito and Tojo are just ink on a page in a history book. The evil they represent has been diluted by time, relative peace and prosperity in America.

…and then Russia attacks Georgia and we are faced with the fact that history repeats itself.

And that a stong national defense, and the proper use and maintenance thereof is of no less value now than in any time in the past.

Probably even moreso now as more and more nations, with our help, gain footholds in world commerce, capitalism and democracy, thereby becoming world powers if not superpowers.

One has to wonder if we weren’t in Iraq and gearing up for an attack or counter-attack on Iran, would our response to Russia’s attack on a burgeoning democracy and ally to the West be more than tough talk on the part of Bush and McCain?

Is our military as stretched as we keep hearing? …or do we have capacity to wage war that is kept up our sleeve?

It seems to me that the attack on Georgia should not have been a surprise, and even if it was, why are we (and I mean the whole Western world) not responding in kind while hundreds maybe thousands of citizens of a sovereign nation lose their lives and homes to a neighboring aggressor?

European leaders have criticized us for Iraq and yet I still get the feeling that those same leaders are looking to us for a reaction to the (now apparently reduced if not ceased) aggression on the part of the Russians.

Will there ever be a time when America is not expected to shoulder the burden as well as the criticism of being the globe’s police force?

In any case, I think it wise for voters to consider their choice for President as it relates to their role as commander and chief of America’s military resources.

Talk is cheap and it is clear that we have given Russia exactly what they anticipated in planning this attack. At the same time, Iran is watching us right now and no doubt the world’s response can only be emboldening their irrational ambitions.

Speaking of cheap talk (guess who):

Chicago, IL — “I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict. Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis.”

Not that George Bush’s response has been all that more assertive:

Mr. Bush, in an interview with NBC Sports, said, “I’ve expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Ossetia.”The president called the violence in Georgia “unacceptable.”He said he did so directly to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who is in Beijing with Mr. Bush for the Olympics, and by phone to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev.“I was very firm with Vladimir Putin,” said Mr. Bush. “Hopefully this will get resolved peacefully.”   

I would have liked to have also heard:

In the mean time, I am working with other world leaders such as France, Germany, Great Britian and Japan to marshal and mobilize military resources to stand ready to defend our ally if Russia continues to defy our demands to stand down.

As costly as military action is, sometimes it is a necessary tool to act as a deterrent to those that would use it against weaker nations. It may be all that they are capable of understanding.

Sometimes the Good Guys need to kick some ass.

I often see “War is not the Answer” lawn signs and bumper stickers and in response I always say “It depends on what the question is.”

Russia (and Iran) may need to be answered soon. I hope we are ready.

…but they may stand around a bit.

Mark your calendars; Saturday is the big sign giveaway at Stephano’s in Eagan.

Here’s why it matters; from Colonel Joe Repya’s press release (I’ve added emphasis):

At noon on September 1, the anti-war crowd claims they’ll have upwards of 50,000 marching from the Minnesota Capitol Building to the Excel Energy Center where the Republican National Convention, at the Excel Energy Center in Saint Paul.

We are asking everyone who supports our men and women in uniform defending America in the War on Terror to line the streets from the Excel Center with our signs. It is our way of being “Minnesota Nice” and wishing these protesters a “nice day in Minnesota.” We encourage no discussion or verbal exchange with the demonstrators – only a pleasant “smile!

So show up!

You can pick up a sign as long as the initial order lasts on Saturday, August 16th, in the parking lot of STEPHANO’S Restaurant, the corner of Highway 13 and Cliff Road (across from Walgreen’s) from 12:00 Noon to 3:00 PM. Please arrive early since we are printing a limited number. Your donations will be greatly appreciated and will allow us to print more signs.

So I’ll see you Saturday afternoon at Stephano’s.

Leave a comment here and/or at the Colonel’s blog if you plan on showing up.

UPDATE 2/8/2010 – Greetings, visitors from “Also Spake Zustra!”  I have a special message for you at the bottom of this post:

Original post follows:

———-

I don’t read the blog “Feministing” for reasoned, rational commentary (via KAR).

Indeed, I rarely read it at all.

As the Twin Cities’ best feminist, it’s depressing, really, to see the perversions that pass for “Feminism” among some of these people.

But you learn to accept that as a given after a while.

What’s funny, though, is catching the occasional dispatch from Cloud Nine.

Academic humanities departments,nationwide, are solidly left-of-center, politically and socially. While my English major advisor indeed, started me on the road to conservatism, we were both outliers. It’s entirely possible to go through a career in humanities, I suspect, and ever have to confront conservatism as anything but a set of stereotypes that you mock with your colleagues.

So this bit here, from a Teaching Assistant at an unnamed graduate program, is interesting; it’s a cry from the heart of a woman having to face…people who approach the world differently than her.

And it’s heart-rending indeed:

I’m a graduate student, teaching a freshman-level writing class. I’ve been a feminist pretty much from the moment my mom popped me out. Anyway, I always lived in a bubble–thinking that the way I thought was simple common sense. Women are equal. Birth control is good. Yada yada yada. I realized as a I grew up, however, that the liberal home life I knew was not the reality for the rest of my peers.

Of course, for many people that can be a growth experience.

Question for the class: How did/does our author perceive this?

And then, last fall, I began teaching composition to university freshmen. My students are, by and large, white, affluent, politically and religiously conservative. To many of them, feminism is a bad word and young, female teachers are pushovers and useless.

To be fair to the students, if this post is any indication, it may not be a group assessment.

Maybe it’s the age gap, as I am 26 to their 18. Maybe it’s the cultural gap, as I am in the deep-South, but spent most of my formative years in more urban, liberal regions of the globe. There are a lot of maybes here.

Yes, indeed. Let’s keep going:

• Maybe you are a cultural bigot.
• Maybe your preening sense of entitlement has left you believing that it’s your way or the highway.

It’s a start.

I loved this bit:

I was making my rounds amongst my students, assisting them at their computers, answering questions, etc. I was sharing an anecdote with a student about my own writing/process, and she (SHE!) asked me what my focus was. I told her–technology and feminist scholarship–and then… the eyes. I heard a short intake of breath. Her eyes grew wide. “Oh my god! Are you a feminist!?” She said the word feminist just the way I say “rapist.”

I nodded. “Yes, I am. Equal rights are a great thing.” She laughed awkwardly, and I moved on.

Who told this young woman that feminism is a bad thing? Seriously–who? She’s a bright woman. She was a fantastic student. But just the same–to her, what I am, is a monster. I don’t feel particularly monstrous.

And she’s not. What she is is a caricature – so much so that a small part of me still thinks “she” is a parody. Feminism – gender identity feminism, to be exact, and as distinct from equity feminism, which is what I believe in – has become a caricature, a caricature that real, “bright women” and “fantastic students”, the people who will go on to productive lives in business, government, society and/or family as they choose, mock without mercy.

It’s a bottomless wellspring of material for some of us. So I’m gladdened to see…

And next Monday, a whole new round begins–and this year, I’m doing more socially-conscious assignments than last year. Could be interesting. But I realize now, that if I don’t ask them pointed questions about how they view the world (be it television, themselves, etc), no one else will, either.

…that not only is the caricature continuing, but it’s growing:

They’ve already made it 18 years without challenging the status quo. Imagine that.

By not becoming Mao-frenching, entitlement-mongering semiotics-of-identity zombies under the influence of the author and the vast majority of her colleagues, they are pantsing the status quo.

Kudos to them.

———-

SPECIAL ADDENDUM FOR “ZUSTRA” READERS: Yeah, my whole “Twin Cities’ Best Feminist” bit really got under some peoples’ skins.  Can they not see how absurdly they were being played?  “Best” Feminist?  Really?

And yet it’s kept the same pack of mental midgets (of both purported genders) howling with rage for years, now.  As if on cue.

I’m trying to find a concept as smug, tautological and dim-witted as “mansplainer” to apply to these – words fail – simpering infants who can’t accept the idea that there’s a rational B-side to their ideas.  But I can’t think of anything that dumb.

Anyway, thanks for stopping!

As we approach primary season, the Override Six are back in the news – a little, anyway.

We’ve been following the Keith  Downey race on one side of Edina, against Ron Erhard; we’d love to see Keith prevail, there.

On the other side of Edina, First Ringer writes about his horse in the race – Jan Schneider:

Nearly six months later one might wonder if the value of the “Override Six” has been ridden hard and put away wet.  Several members are retiring.  Others were quietly endorsed.  One has switched parties.  Of the offending six, only one significant primary remains – that of endorsed Republican Jan Schneider and incumbent Neil Peterson.  Peterson has the traditional advantages of incumbency alongside a name recognition born out of a career in politics stretching back nearly 30 years as a Bloomington city councilmember and mayor.  And thanks to his transportation bill vote, Peterson’s coffers are also flush with special interest cash.

Schneider’s career trajectory has been quite different – taking place in business, not politics, where she’s worked as a senior business consultant for both start-ups and Fortune 500 companies.  Having spent 25 years helping companies cut waste, prioritize spending, and strategically plan from soup to nuts, Jan’s background seems more necessary than ever in a state that’s gone from a $2 billion surplus to a $1 billion deficit.  Jan is experienced, conservative and unlike the incumbent won’t be voting 52% of the time with the DFL.  In the words of blogger Gary Gross, “I wish we had a candidate of Jan Schneider’s quality running in each hotly contested district. If we did, we’d be in great shape.”

What Jan needs is money – and your support.

He’s right, of course; Peterson got a ton of swag out of betraying the Governor last spring, to say nothing of the usual fawning coverage from the “The Only Good Republican Is A RINO” media.

But Schneider is worth your support.  Count on hearing her on the NARN before the primary; she’s pretty sharp, and Edina could sure use her in office.

One:  Tom Swift and Mark Gisleson discussion the fine-point pros and cons of Hayek over a bottle of Chilean Pinot Grigio.

Two: The Cubs winning the World Series.

Three:  Any of the Twin Cities’ deep-pocketed leftyblogs showing the faintest shred of knowledge about economics.

UPDATE:  Oops.  Wrote too soon.

Chalk it up to basic economics of supply and demand.

Americans are driving less, and the price of gas keeps falling.

Unmentioned:  The psychological boost of the Republican push to drill and build refineries.

Hey, I did specify “faint shred”, right?

Rod Hamilton – one of the six “Republican” legislators who stabbed Governor Pawlenty in the back last session – is learning the hard way; the DFL doesn’t make Republican friends; they just recruit stooges:

Six months ago, Rod Hamilton was center stage in the biggest drama at the State Capitol. And so was Hwy. 60, a crucial roadway splitting southern Minnesota that many believe is in need of expansion and improvements.

Today, the theatrics continue, with Hamilton in effect complaining that he was duped, and Hwy. 60 is no nearer to getting the attention he thinks it needs.

And so Hamilton – with five other Republicans In Name Only – joined with the DFL to ram through one of the most egregious tax hikes in Minnesota history.

Oh, he had his reasons…:

At the time Hamilton made things clear: If DFLers would provide funding for Hwy. 60, they would get his vote.

When Hamilton, a pork producer [Hahahahahahahaha! – Ed.] whose district relies heavily on the highway, cast his vote to override, the legislation contained 22 lines that appeared to instruct the Minnesota Department of Transportation to give Hwy. 60 a higher priority for funding.

…but that all depends on what the definition of the term “is” “funded” is.

But MnDOT now contends the language was never clear and is withholding any commitment to the Hwy. 60 project.

What’s more, the key DFL legislator who sponsored the transportation bill said Hamilton misunderstood the language concerning Hwy. 60.

Rod Hamilton:  Traitor?  Naive?  Stupid?  All the above?

I bet it all seemed like such a good idea back when Lori Sturdevant was offering to paint his toenails…

The Core of The Matrix is the wireless smart phone. A device as reviled as it is praised. It has brought freedom to our lifestyles while at the same time been the subject of “Hang Up and Drive” bumper stickers.

I installed Facebook on mine today. I’ve never been more connected with more people in more places, from Cedar Rapids to San Francisco; South Minneapolis; Switzerland to Italy.

Save the distraction these devices surely cause to drivers (and apparently walkers alike), the health risk these devices pose whilst pressed to one’s cranium for sometimes hours at a time is not yet clear.

Numerous studies have been conducted, the lion’s share by the wireless industry itself, lending the “all clear” declaration dubious merit at best.

Why Cell-Phone Health Concerns Persist 

If putting Garfield in the microwave causes the critter mortal harm (anecdotally speaking of course), it stands to reason, even allowing for the difference in frequency and power, that a cellular telephone likely has some effect on the brain – certainly the side of your head.

Whether that effect is a slight rise in temperature akin to the hysteria-inducing magnitude cited in the Man-Made Global Warming/Cooling/Change movement or tumors the size of golf balls has yet to be conclusively determined. Cell phones have enjoyed societal saturation for about ten years. Brain tumors reportedly have a gestation period that is more often than not at least that.

As for me my approach is as my approach to God and Nutritional Supplements.

I believe in God and Vitamins because I’d rather be wrong and have had faith all the while than the other way around when I’ve written my last blog post.

So I use a headset and forward my cell phone to my desk phone as much as possible. I don’t give my kids cell phones. I use the Bluetooth system in my car and I don’t care if you can’t hear me as well.

I moderate the pressing of the flesh with my Treo 755p.

What say you?

When I cast my first-ever conservative vote – for Ronald Reagan, in 1984 – I didn’t tell anyone. Part of it was that the whole conversion from mushy-left to right was so very recent. Part of it was that I was still feeling my way around an unfamiliar place.

And a big part was that I really just didn’t want to be associated with “those” conservatives.

In the media of the day, “out” conservatives were pretty much portrayed as smug fundamentalist televangelists, warmongering caricatures or malthusian skinflints. I edited a college newspaper at the time, and our syndication service – the “Campus News Service” – fed us a constant stream of anti-conservative, anti-Republican propaganda in written and cartoon form, all of it based on the three stereotypes above and the notion, constantly hammered in story after story, cartoon after cartoon, that President Reagan was

a) a doddering buffoon
b) a warmongering psychopath
c) both.

I got over it.

I graduated, moved to the Twin Cities – and it got worse. The media of the day ranged from left-leaning (it was the golden age of Jim Klobuchar; Nick Coleman was just getting started as a columnist) to falling-over left. Just before I started my old KSTP talk show, I remember reading a piece in the City Pages about some counselor/”artist” type in some political action group saying – unchallenged – “liberalism is the only intellectually acceptable philosophy”.

The attitude one perceived could have fairly been called “contemptuous” against conservative people and ideas.

And on the issues? Well, it was at KSTP in 1987, in a discussion on handgun control, where I first heard the old chestnut “I think people who think they need guns are…[brief pause as a verbal wink and nudge] compensating for something…”. It is, of course, the standard line for anti-gunners who want to believe they’re bringing the forces of soft science to bear against their opponents without actually understanding any. And it is nothing if not contemptuous. And it’s not the only issue where conservative substance has been met for decades with ignorant contempt.

To sum up: Twenty years ago, the contempt for conservatives was everywhere.

One thing that was not everywhere was avenues for response. This was before the market drove talk radio to the right. This was before conservatives had any written outlet, short of the National Review and the odd token George Will or Cal Thomas column set into the OpEd page like an exhibit at a zoo. The Strib’s letters to the editor, then as now, published only the most carefully-bowdlerized selection of conservative opinion (seemingly selected for sounding the least coherent, at times)

Today, of course, it’s a different story. Conservatives have voices – and those voices pretty well crush the opposition (which is why the Democrats are talking about bringing back the “Fairness” doctrine). Conservatives have outlets, and they’ve become influential out of all proportion to their size, which is why George Soros and his deep-pocketed friends are trying to buy a share of the blogosphere; it’s not really working (which is why the left has already tried to regulate blog content).

At any rate, in the last twenty years – and especially the past five years or so – people on the left, especially people who remember what life was like back when the conservative in the street only got to speak at the bar and around the table and every couple of years at the polls have had to learn that there really are more than one side to an argument.

The masthead of Charlie Quimby’s blog reads “How Can People Disagree And Still Build a Decent World?”; it’s a good question, one that I ask a lot in this blog and – rather more often – in personal conversation. It is important, and not merely because I’m a conservative with a mother who thinks Jane Fonda is a reactionary.

Charlie poked a little fun last week at the selection of Republicans getting credentials at the Convention next month. The common thread he found: “From Ladies Logic to Grizzly Groundswell to Pair O’Dice you’ll find at least one thing in common: a fairly strong contempt for liberals.”
Over the weekend and still on the subject (having gotten some pushback from a couple of the bloggers he’d names), he asked:

It is possible to separate personal relationships and politics. The success of any free political system depends on it. But over the past 20 years or so, it seems to be happening less and less. Contempt — not just philosophical disagreement — has been ratcheted up and real tolerance for human differences over policies is given the sort of smirking pro forma observance we see between Hannity and Colmes…

The difference, I suggest, is that over the past twenty years contempt and ridicule (and the guys behind their respective curtains, ignorance and fear) have become two-way streets. There’s not more contempt and ridicule; you can just see it. And if you’re a Twin Cities’ liberal, you can see it aimed at you for the first time.
You don’t have to read Nick Coleman or Lori Sturdevant or Brian Lambert all that terribly long to realize that Minnesota liberals of a certain age just aren’t used to being questioned, much less criticized, to say nothing of being the objects of contempt. I’m going to venture that not one of them, growing up in acceptably-lefty households, coming up through a left-leaning academic establishment, and working a career in left-leaning newsrooms, has ever heard someone say “I don’t know why people need pay-equity laws, unless they’re compensating for something, nyuk nyuk”.

Or bloggers and their invisible moonbat/wingnut friends. Which is why here I try to make those exchanges real and open, aimed at understanding rather than refuting the other.

Contempt is the tip on the iceberg of ignorance and – toward the bottom – hatred. I try to avoid it, and seek out conversation with the rare liberal blogger who’s not too stupid and sodden with fake intellectual entitlement…

…oh, crap. Let me start over.

Contempt is the junk food of rhetoric; it’s cheap, easy, and sometimes all you have in the cupboard. It’s easy to say “I don’t use it”; everyone knows better. There are times when it’s the easiest way to respond to the gaffes and slights and sins of the “other” side. It was the same thing twenty years ago; if Hubert Humphrey and Ronald Reagan are the respective egos of the left and right, “guns are compensating for something” and “liberalism is a mental disorder” are the respective ids. And we all balance these in different ways.

At some point, contempt for ideas and values becomes contempt for a group becomes contempt for a person, as the bones in mass graves the world over attest.

True.

But a lot of things have changed in the last decade or two. Liberals in the Twin Cities are having some inevitable growing pains realizing that there is more than one point of view in this world (just like conservatives in Austin Texas and Chapel Hill North Carolina have been having to do).
It’s just all out in the open now.

The only real question now is how people deal with it – a question people have to answer whenever there is more than one side to a debate.

Which is why it’s such a new thing in the Twin Cities.

For decades – until the larger movement started wising up just a tad, within the past decade or so – one of the standard gun control advocates’ lines usually went like this:

“Guns may be fine in rural America, but in the city – in urban America – guns are a plague that needs to be controlled”.

“Urban”, in this liberal context, meant “black people” pretty universally. Given gun control’s universally racist roots, it’s understandable.

Likewise on tax policy; tax cuts proposed by suburban and rural interests were seen as a dagger at the heart of “urban” American – meaning “America of color” to the left.

“But wait, Mitch”, you might respond. “Where is that written down?”

The Urban League; Urban Studies programs; Urban issues. All of them are code words of the left. All of them are, to one degree or another, code words for “black”.

To the right? True conservatives don’t focus on race – but “Urban” is a code word as well. It means “bureaucratic”, “dominated by lefties and their visions”, “a net tax suck on society”. And judging by the lilywhite (albeit impeccably-far-left) makeup of most “urban” governments, it’s – to be charitable – color-blind. Being less charitable, it means “white-as-the-driven-dandruff”.

Of course, we have other code words on the right. “Journalistic Code of Ethics”, to a civilian, means “rules”. Not so, to “journalists” and the conservatives who watch ’em; for them, it means “framework by which “journalists” rationalize unethical behavior”.

Steve Perry – former journalist, now kommissar of the Minnesoros “Independent”, plumbs the left’s bottomless well of callow racism in this bit of yellow flakkery, about a recent speech by Rep. Michele Bachmann:

“This is their agenda,” Bachmann states bluntly. “I know it is hard to believe, it’s hard to fathom—but this is ‘mission accomplished’ for them,” she asserts. “They want Americans to take transit and move to the inner cities. They want Americans to move to the urban core, live in tenements, [and] take light rail to their government jobs. That’s their vision for America.”

The context is fairly clear: Liberals want cities to be centralized; they see our future as high-density, connected by rails and bikes and scooters, shopping at vegan corner delis selling only locally-produced goodies; above all, they see us paying taxes, directly and indirectly, to The Man. The Democrat, Liberal Man (race irrelevant).

Can anyone see, by any rational measure supported by any sort of context at all, any other meaning to Rep. Bachmann’s statement?

Outside of the projection of insecure liberals, I mean?

Of course not. There is none.

Which doesn’t stop Perry – Soros-employed rentablogger – to make some up out of whole cloth:

Inner cities. Urban core. Tenements. Here, in a nutshell, is one explanation for Bachmann’s urgency in spreading the $2-a-gallon gospel: To save her sort of people from living in close proximity to, um, Negroes.

Note to Mr. Perry: Look up the term “projection”.

No, really. Your publications have always wallowed in it.  But it’s OK – it’s not original.  It’s a pattern.  The people that pay Perry’s salary want callow racemongering, so they’ll get it.

Why would that be?

UPDATE:  Commenter Master of None notes that code words are, indeed, everywhere.  Say “suburb” to a real lefty – for example, this old, deranged colleague of Steve Perry’s – and see what happens.

Hollywood and the left connected at the hip?  The hell you say!

Oscar-winner [George “Cloud of Smug”] Clooney, 47, is said to be helping the Democratic candidate to polish his image at home and abroad.

But he is also sharing with Obama his strong opinions on Iraq and the Middle East.

Sources say the actor has tried to hide the pair’s friendship for fear his Left-wing views and playboy image would hurt the Presidential hopeful’s bid for the White House.
But Democratic Party insiders have revealed that Clooney and Obama regularly send texts and emails to each other and speak by phone at least twice a week.
One [Obama advisor] said last night: ‘They are extremely close. A number of members of the Hollywood community, including Brad Pitt, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, offered to help raise funds for Barack but it was with George that he struck up this amazing affinity.

‘George has been giving him advice on things such as presentation, public speaking and body language and he also emails him constantly about policy, especially the Middle East.

Not sure if Clooney’s given Obama one of those “Miami Vice (TM) Three Day Stubble” razors, though…

‘George is pushing him to be more “balanced” on issues such as US relations with Israel.
‘George is pro-Palestinian. And he is also urging Barack to withdraw unconditionally from Iraq if he wins.
‘It’s a very risky relationship. His hope of becoming America’s first black President depends heavily on winning over conservative voters and it would be suicidal for him to be perceived as a tool of a Hollywood Leftie, which is how they regard George.

Really?  Would it be “suicidal” if “undecided Middle America” were to read that the couple…

‘…text and email each other almost every day and speak on the phone at least a couple of times a week, often more.’

…or…

‘[Clooney] told me he feels Obama is a once-in-a-lifetime leader. He is doing everything he can behind the scenes to bolster support in Hollywood, not just with other celebrities but with the money men at the studios.’

Oooh, I bet.  Suicide is bad! Wouldn’t want that leaking out to Middle America!

The acquaintance added: ‘He has tried to keep the true extent of their involvement out of the Press because he is frightened of alienating voters.’

And I bet this story – in the London Daily Mail – never sees the light of day outside Variety Magazine.

Or this bit:

The star has never tried to hide his liberal views and last week announced he is making a £15million film about the lawyer who defended Osama Bin Laden’s former driver, Salim Hamdan, on terror charges.

Wow.

As America waits for the first film about the actual heroism of America’s fighting men and women in the past six years…

…anyway.  Good luck, Barack.  We’ll make sure word about your BFF the Hamas-hugging George “Cloud of Smug” Clooney stays safely under wraps.

You can count on me, Barry!

Yesterday, my blog partner JRoosh lit up a grossly dumb letter to the editor from the Strib.

But the gift of that letter just keeps on giving; the letter author – a Bill McGaughey of Minneapolis – isn’t just a crank letter-writer with deficient logical skills.

No. He’s also a Congressional candidate; he’s been endorsed to run for the US House of Representatives from the Fifth Congressional District.

And he had this to say last week on a Minnesota political discussion listserver:

While the world’s people want peace, world leaders have created a situation of persistent violence. The horrible, deranged act of a Chinese man against Minnesotan Todd Bachman and his wife in Beijing’s Drum Tower pales in comparison to the scale of violence that is now taking place in South Ossetia, a region caught in the crosshairs of a power struggle between U.S.-backed Georgia and Russia that is important to maintaining supplies of oil.

Pales. Also completely unrelated.

But what’s a little non-sequitur?

Oh, it gets better (emphasis added):

Now there is evidence that the United States Government is hell-bent on precipitating a crisis with Iran. Granted, the information that comes to me from the Internet may not be totally reliable, but there is enough evidence from many different sources to suggest that armed conflict is not a “last resort”, as is often claimed, but an active, urgent imperative for powerful persons and groups in the Bush administration, notably Vice President Cheney.

Consider this: “Seymour Hersh says Bush administration officials held a meeting recently in the Vice President’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran, Think Progress reports. During the meeting, an idea was considered to dress up Navy Seals as Iranians, put them on fake Iranian speedboats, and shoot at them … This idea, intended to provoke an Iran war, was ultimately rejected ‘because you can’t have Americans killing Americans,’ Hersh says.”

Look – there’s plenty of Iranian speedboats to shoot at. But hey, if Seymour Hersh (via “Think”Progress”) says so…

Now comes another report from the blog of the Earl of Stirling – Stirling Castle was home to Scottish royalty prior to Scotland’s political merger with England – regarding an American “armada” that had recently conducted war games in the north Atlantic and was heading to the Persian Gulf to impose a naval blockage.

Er, where does the “Earl of Stirling” think the US and British navies are supposed to train, whether they’re going to “impose” a “blockage” or just deploy to the Gulf…

….where they’ve been deploying pretty much constantly for the past three decades?

The blogging earl, who holds the title of Lord High Admiral of Nova Scotia, names many of the ships in this multinational armada. He writes: “The build up of naval forces in the Gulf will be one of the largest multi-national naval armadas since the First and Second Gulf Wars. The intent is to create a US/EU naval blockade (which is an Act of War under international law) around Iran (with supporting air and land elements) to prevent the shipment of benzene and certain other refined oil products headed to Iranian ports. Iran has limited domestic oil refining capacity and imports 40% of its benzene. Cutting off benzene and other key products would cripple the Iranian economy. The neo-cons are counting on such a blockade launching a war with Iran.”

Just a question, Mr. McGaughey; what do you call what Iran’s been doing for almost thirty years, now?  Kidnapping our diplomats?  Paying for anti-US terror around the world?  Arming and funding terror against US forces in Iraq?

Threatening to obliterate Israel and anyone who helps them?

In any event, we seem to be headed toward a wreck of colossal proportions. The question is what average U.S. citizens, such as you and I, can do about it. We can urge our members of Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney. While I have had some sympathy for the attitude of the Democratic leadership in Congress that we should wait it out until a new President is elected, now it appears that the Bush administration is poised to do major, irreparable damage before it leaves office; and John McCain, who supports the President’s war policies, has become a strong contender in the race with Barack Obama. But it is virtually impossible that the Administration leadership could be taken out by such means. So what do we do? I’ve run out of good ideas.

Here’s an idea:  Run for Congress!

Take it to Rep. Ellison!

I’m here for ya, Bill!

Lefties in the Fifth District; Bill McGaughey is the real soul of liberalism!

And Jesse Ventura – the only Independence Party candidate who will ever be has ever been elected to office –  the guy with the “9/11 was an inside job!” sticker on his Porsche, is the perfect leader for this movement.

So Democrats – write him i9n for Senate!

They are the soul of the left!

Isaac Hayes dead at 65:

With his muscular build, shiny head and sunglasses, Hayes cut a striking figure at a time when most of his contemporaries were sporting Afros. His music, which came to be known as urban-contemporary, paved the way for disco as well as romantic crooners like Barry White.

And in his spoken-word introductions and interludes, Hayes was essentially rapping before there was rap. His career hit another high in 1997 when he became the voice of Chef, the sensible school cook and devoted ladies man on the animated TV show “South Park.”…

Hayes was born in 1942 in a tin shack in Covington, Tenn., about 40 miles north of Memphis. He was raised by his maternal grandparents after his mother died and his father took off when he was 1 1/2. The family moved to Memphis when he was 6.

Hayes wanted to be a doctor, but got redirected when he won a talent contest in ninth grade by singing Nat King Cole‘s “Looking Back.”

He held down various low-paying jobs, including shining shoes on the legendary Beale Street in Memphis. He also played gigs in rural Southern juke joints where at times he had to hit the floor because someone began shooting.

RIP.

Just another reminder; Saturday is the big sign giveaway at Stephano’s in Eagan.

We’re talking Col. Joe Repya’s signs.

Here’s why it matters; from Joe’s press release (I’ve added emphasis):

At noon on September 1, the anti-war crowd claims they’ll have upwards of 50,000 marching from the Minnesota Capitol Building to the Excel Energy Center where the Republican National Convention, at the Excel Energy Center in Saint Paul.

We are asking everyone who supports our men and women in uniform defending America in the War on Terror to line the streets from the Excel Center with our signs. It is our way of being “Minnesota Nice” and wishing these protesters a “nice day in Minnesota.” We encourage no discussion or verbal exchange with the demonstrators – only a pleasant “smile!

So show up!

You can pick up a sign as long as the initial order lasts on Saturday, August 16th, in the parking lot of STEPHANO’S Restaurant, the corner of Highway 13 and Cliff Road (across from Walgreen’s) from 12:00 Noon to 3:00 PM. Please arrive early since we are printing a limited number. Your donations will be greatly appreciated and will allow us to print more signs.

So I’ll see you Saturday at Stephano’s.

Leave a comment here and/or at the Colonel’s blog if you plan on showing up.

…when her daddy implored her to enter rehab, she stuck to her principles and replied

“No. No. No.”

You go girl!

Another great Letter of the Day

I admire Paris Hilton. While her life circumstances have been far from difficult, she has taken an identity that society despises and made something of it.

Profound. Where do you start with a statement so brimming with stupidity?

Paris Hilton didn’t take an identity that society despises. She doesn’t personify an identity that society despises. She is the identity that society despises. She invented it and the fact that it was by design, having nothing else to occupy her time, is hardly a station to be celebrated.

Paris was conceived where wealth and neglect meet. She is the product of the Cream of the Crap in America.

She did not turn to lawyers when the embarrassing sex tapes surfaced, but instead “went with the flow” of her notoriety and became one of the world’s foremost celebrities.

Of course she didn’t turn to lawyers. They were undoubtedly consulted, along with others, as to the best means, media and timing of their release. She profited by the strategic use of her genitalia (is it okay to say that here Mitch?).

It never ceases to amaze me how celebrity is oft equated with credibility in our culture.

She’s a “foremost celebrity.” Is that sort of like “wholesome feces?”

At its peril has the John McCain campaign learned to trifle with Paris. She’s back in the spotlight with a rebuttal to the TV ad and her energy plan, which is said to be superior in ways to those which the presidential candidates have presented.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Surely her rebuttal was a non-plus to the McCain campaign, who (I’m chuckling at the choice of words) trifled with Paris, but I am equally sure that Obama’s campaign suffered even further as the questions it begged of him were answered with…with…with…um…(sorry it escapes me).

Yes, she is, as she says of herself, “hot.” Not bad for a day’s work while soaking up the sun.

BILL MCGaughey, Minneapolis

Paris is a broken bat. You got no shot with Paris, Bill. Go back to your People magazine.

US truckers are getting stopped, inspected, arrested and fined for buying diesel fuel in Mexico, at about half the price as in the US, with the intention of taking it back into the USA.

While filling a primary fuel tank isn’t illegal, Mexico prohibits additional fuel tanks (aka auxiliary tanks) to be filled and moved across the border, so many truck owners with long-range tanks are finding themselves breaking Mexican federal law. Truck owners are getting stopped on the Mexican side of the border and their trucks are confiscated while authorities run tests to determine the origin of the fuel. If found in violation, owners face stiff fines. The Mexican Consulate is offering a blanket warning for all truck owners equipped with secondary fuel tanks to not drive those vehicles into Mexico.

At the same time, the Mexican government objects when the US fortifies its border with Mexico to prevent Mexican citizens from overloading US healthcare facilities and schools.

Mexico confiscates trucks crossing border for cheap diesel

StarTribune’s Letter of the Day:

So John McCain is making money by mocking Barack Obama’s suggestion to save fuel by making sure our tires are properly inflated and getting regular tuneups. An Aug. 5 article said McCain’s presidential campaign is offering supporters tire gauges labeled “Obama Energy Plan” in exchange for a $25 donation.

A fairly brilliant campaign strategy, actually.

Obama’s gaffe revealed Obama’s energy policy is full of hot air. The reality is, the technology to replace our dependence on fossil fuel is years away and keeping our tires full of Obama’s rhetoric is no solution.

As a drivers education instructor, I used textbooks that teach important strategies on improving gas mileage in any vehicle. These strategies include properly inflating your tires, having regular tuneups and using your cruise control whenever possible.

Textbooks. Indeed. I was looking in the owner’s manual of my 2006 Chrysler 300C for “Tune-Ups”. Obama used to drive the same car until he parked it far away and put a Hybrid in his driveway for appearances sake.

It seems modern cars don’t require tune-ups. Haven’t for years.

Properly inflated tires can save between .06 and 2.25 percent depending on who you talk to. Last time I checked, fuel prices have increased a few magnitudes more than that.

It’s not that keeping your car in good working order, including keeping your tires inflated is not valid advice. It’s just that Obama was caught grabbing at straws while McCain took the high (or at least popular) ground on energy. Now Obama is slowly flopping over on drilling because it is needed, sooner than later, and the American people decidedly agree.

This tactic of making fun of tried and true research sounds eerily familiar. Remember how President Bush’s cronies distorted and discredited research on global warming? Look where that has gotten us. It seems rather than come up with effective, researched plans of their own, the conservative Republicans would rather make trivial attacks to win over voters.

Ah, yes. Global Warming. It’s Bush’s cronies? Conservatives are disgusted with Bush’s stance on Global Warming (same goes for McCain by the way).

How about the UN’s own IPCC stating that temperatures have been dropping of late. The UN is hardly a bastion of conservative thought.

Don’t hang your hat on Global Warming. The “science” behind the hysteria will soon prove to be as empty as Obama’s energy policies.

Wake up, voters! Don’t get duped again by Karl Rove and his surrogates’ tactics.

MARK VOSSEN, ST. MICHAEL

Here’s a little warm milk, Mr. Vossen. Time for your nap. Nighty night.

It was Tuesday, August 9, 1988.

I was getting irrationally exuberant.

After my “success” the previous week getting the program director at WMCA in New York to actually ask me for an audition tape – and it was a success, in its own way – I started thinking big.

I called WOR. Perhaps it was the confidence that comes from irrational exuberance, but I got through to the Program Director.

He was a nice guy. We chatted for a bit. He, also, asked for my audition tape.

Wow.

I dug through the book a little more, and found another talk station, up in White Plains.

I had no idea where or what White Plains was, but I called.

He wanted a tape too.

Whoah.

It’s just a week until the big sign giveaway at Stephano’s in Eagan.

We’re talking Col. Joe Repya’s signs.

From the Joe’s press release (I’ve added emphasis):

At noon on September 1, the anti-war crowd claims they’ll have upwards of 50,000 marching from the Minnesota Capitol Building to the Excel Energy Center where the Republican National Convention, at the Excel Energy Center in Saint Paul.

We are asking everyone who supports our men and women in uniform defending America in the War on Terror to line the streets from the Excel Center with our signs. It is our way of being “Minnesota Nice” and wishing these protesters a “nice day in Minnesota.” We encourage no discussion or verbal exchange with the demonstrators – only a pleasant “smile!

So show up!

You can pick up a sign as long as the initial order lasts on Saturday, August 16th, in the parking lot of STEPHANO’S Restaurant, the corner of Highway 13 and Cliff Road (across from Walgreen’s) from 12:00 Noon to 3:00 PM. Please arrive early since we are printing a limited number. Your donations will be greatly appreciated and will allow us to print more signs.

So I’ll see you one week from today at Stephano’s.

Leave a comment here and/or at the Colonel’s blog if you plan on showing up.

Hey – the event even got some play with MPR!

The Wall Stree Journal picks up where the New York Times left off:

Minnesota’s Vice Presidential Contender

Being on John McCain’s short list for vice president makes Tim Pawlenty a busy guy.

Pawlenty takes a shot at Obama. He’s not just a goalie after all. 

Following that, a side trip to Iowa where, as national co-chair for Sen. McCain’s presidential campaign, he passed out tire gauges as a way of poking fun at Barack Obama’s suggestion the energy crisis be addressed by having Americans better inflate their cars.

If there is such a thing as campaigning to become somebody’s vice president, Mr. Pawlenty is doing a good job in the auditions.

(more…)