Blog Summit 2007

I met Mike Mathias (Pundit Nation), James Wigderson (Wigderson Library and Pub) at the Starbucks on 16th and Wisconsin. James got his exercise in early by walking to the wrong Starbucks at 6th and Wisconsin, and then bravely hiking back up Wisconsin to our location. That he made it unscathed says something about goings on east of 124th Street.

Seriously, it was good to see Mike (only the second time in 19 some years) and James (first time in 19 some years). Mike, James and I were contemporaries at UWM. Mike and I wrote together for the UWM Post, while James was involved with the UWM Times, which I think is now defunct, not sure. Though tensions often were high between the opposing political camps at UWM, I’d like to think that Mike, James and I kept it a little more real than some of the others.

Anyway, we made our way to the event and following are some thoughts:

James made it walking up three flights of stairs to the event. Way to go!

I enjoyed meeting Owen Robinson (Boots and Sabers). Owen is a current West Bend resident, which happens to be where I grew up, went to high school, etc. I listened to Owen and was impressed by his speaking ability, and that though he is as partisan as they come, he came down squarely on the side of all bloggers, defending their rights to have a voice. However, his analysis of Eugene Kane was waaaay off. I liked Kane. The first time I ever met him, though I did not have an opportunity to talk with him. I liked him because he was unapologetic and spoke his mind. Apparently speaking ones mind is only relegated to conservative speech according to some conservatives.

I met Dave Casper (Ask Me Later) and Aaron Kreel (Subject To Change), two other conservative bloggers, and liked them immediately. I didn’t get much chance to speak with Dave, but our shared thoughts about Ms McBride are enough to acknowledge him as a kindred spirit, if not ideologically. Aaron is a nice guy. He showed me pictures of his newborn. Very cute kiddo. I wish him the best.

I also saw Phelony Jones (The Confidentials) from a distance. She looked, as she is wont to say, very sassy. Unfortunately for us (or wisely) she left the proceedings early.

I also had brief conversations with Patrick of Badger Blogger, Tom McMahon and Dean Mundy. All pretty decent people … for conservatives (just kidding, guys). I have to agree with Owen on this, I find myself liking a number of conservative bloggers (though I suspect if I had met Fred Dooley, my opinion of him would not change).

Oh, and Brian Fraley (Daily Takes) had nothing to say but tired clichés. He is a wiener.

And Jessica McBride is as annoying in person as she is in print and/or on the radio. She attempted to make a point about blogger diversity by pointing out conservatives were bloggers and … could you believe it, conservative women. Now, this is true, but she followed that up by stressing it this way (paraphrasing) … “can you believe it, a conservative woman” (referring to herself and just herself). Mike Plaisted came over later and said he liked the t-shirts I had made for Ms McBride’s benefit. He then pointed out her silliness (kind way to say she’s an obnoxious b—tch). I agreed, and said I had almost raised my hand to ask her if it was always about her … but in the interest of decorum had decided not to.

Anyway, she’s a wiener, too.

I also was glad to meet the aforementioned Plaisted, Sean Hackbarth (American Mind) and Cory Liebman, whose blog I have admired. I also spoke at length with Bert, a contributor at folkbum. He was ten years a reporter. I didn’t ask where. I should have. And, I got to share a moment with Renee Crawford. I liked her.

All in all, it was a pretty good time and I have to admit, I agreed with Charlie Sykes (just a couple times.)

Lastly, where was dad29? I would really like to have met him. And where was my erstwhile buddy, Chris of Spotted Horse fame? Oh well, one can’t have everything all the time.

McBride, Again

Jessica McBride wants us to look at this paragraph.

MADISON, Wis. Republican legislative leaders asked Attorney General J-B Van Hollen today for his opinion on how a U-S Supreme Court decision might affect the state's ban on a procedure critics call partial-birth abortion.

She has this to say about that paragraph.

Let's see. Babies are partially born before they are killed in the procedure. Sounds like a factually-based description to me.

For our factually challenged quasi-journalist let’s clear this up: The actual name for the procedure is “intact dilation and evacuation.” The paragraph clearly states that critics, that is anti-abortion supporters, call the procedure partial birth abortion. News organizations are under no obligation to use the intentionally-created term designed to fool the foolish into voting against this medically sound and rarely used procedure, regardless of how the Supreme Court ruled.


Also posted at Whallah!

Go get a doggy bag and pick up your crap, Ms McBride.

McIlheran: Favors White Supremacists?

This is just a quick note about a blog post by Patrick McIlheran (already well-covered by Bert at folkbum). David Gaubatz, the fellow that Melanie Phillips and McIlheran rely on for the breaking news on WMDs is a member of a fascinating group that believes in wonderful, pro-American ideals like this (by way of Glenn Greenwald, h/t Bert):

White Christians were at the founding of this nation a distinct people and privileged as such. Men of means among this people were given the opportunity for representative government. This is, for those of you flinching, not a thesis or “viewpoint”; this is historical fact.

After the Civil War, this changed; with the move into the 20th century this change became a wholesale reformation. Today, you cannot speak of Christianity in the public sphere and if you mention “white” and “Christians” in the same sentence you will be set upon as a despicable racist by every “fair-minded” public person. And, this phenomenon extends far beyond race.

Then this:

It was of course the beloved Ronald Reagan, the David of conservatism against the Goliath of Liberalism, who was the first president in the history of the US to actually grant amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants with his support of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. And before that, it was the Great Society’s Lyndon B. Johnson who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which eliminated nation-specific quotas, replacing them with just one overall quota. This meant of course that we had as a country effectively determined that we were not a white Christian nation, but would become a brownish-black nation of third world types who could barely speak our language, knew nothing of our culture and civilization, and indeed desired to be one of “us” predominantly for economic reasons.

And this:

Immigration is now at the front lines in the battle for America's national existence. Under assault by the Left, including the Libertarians, the fact that America was founded and made strong by immigrants from western European countries with Judeo-Christian roots is no longer part of the modern immigration "debate." The only question now is how do you secure your borders and establish the necessary factors for "assimilation." This "debate" of course ignores the most fundamental fact: is there not something unique about American national existence that is directly related to the fact that it was founded by white, mostly anglo-saxon, believing Christians? Does the modern charge of "racism" now preclude the observation and analysis of this fact?

McIlheran's friend Gaubatz is currently engaged in mapping every mosque and Islamic day school in America, attempting to come up with a “threat” picture.

I knew McIlheran was whacky. Who would have thought he had such weird fellow-travelers … well, easy to believe actually.

Back At It Again

Patrick McIlheran is at it again. At least he is consistent. Now he’s got a piece claiming the environment is not as bad as those nasty scientists say it is. Everyone has an opinion on this and that’s okay. It’s just that McIlheran keeps trotting out these conservative think tank groups that have a vested interest in saying everything is peachy keen, to back up his assertions, rather than use real science. For example:

American Enterprise Institute: The American Enterprise Institute is a neoconservative think tank, AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. (Wikipedia)

Pacific Research Institute: Another think tank, which has been closely associated with the American Enterprise Institute. (SourceWatch)

Steven Hayward: Hayward studies the environment, law, political economy, and the presidency. He is author of the annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, published jointly by the American Enterprise Institute and the Pacific Research Institute. Hayward writes AEI's Environmental Policy Outlook and also recently authored The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980 (American Enterprise Institute).

Ah, a scientist devoted to the environment, NOT!

Look, McIlheran does point out that this is a different point of view. But, why oh why does he continue to abuse the intelligence of those who read his tripe. Just come out and admit it, Paddy, you don’t have a clue what you are writing about … you just do it to piss off the other half of the people who read your columns and blog entries, the ones who don’t take your writings at face value.

McBride Fails Again

I stopped today at the gas station around the corner to pick up some ice for the celebration of spring barbeque we were having. A young friend of mine was working. He is in his senior year at UWM, is an honor student and will be moving onto law school next year where, I am sure, he will succeed. Anyway, he told me that I would be amused by this story.

He said he was driving home one night and happened to be listening to Jessica McBride's show. She was talking about the Virginia Tech murder spree and apparently was chastising the school for not having closed the campus the next few days after. My friend decided to call in. The screener/producer answered the phone and asked what topic he wanted to talk to Jessica about. My friend said he wanted to discuss the school closing issue because he disagreed with Ms McBride. The screen said thank you and hung up.

It’s typical of wing-nut talk show hosts; especially McBride. She won't take on anyone who can match or exceed her intelligence (nearly everyone), but will wait for that stray idiot just so she can claim later how she was able to "smack" down another liberal.

McBride, Again

Another example of why Jessica McBride is the fruitiest of the fruit loops in the wing-nut world. On her blog Thursday, she tried to say that Joe Biden was inarticulate. Here is what she had to say.

"Guess he's an inarticulate as Obama.

By the way, only Democrats could get away with blaming a non-conservative talk show host's problems on conservatives. And exploiting Virginia Tech."

What a clueless wonkette!

ADDENDUM
A friend of mine pointed out that this post was a wee bit ambiguous. Looking back at it, I had to agree. I have not been applying much energy into blogging with the arrival of my daughter, but that is not an excuse for putting out sloppy efforts.

I was trying to point out McBride’s hypocrisy in pointing out that Joe Biden seemed to have an inarticulate moment during a speech (leaving aside that a written report cannot possibly duplicate how a speech sounds). Considering she is an ardent defender of Mr. Language-Mangler himself, her response, which I highlighted above, was hilarious.

Remember, she is a “professional” journalist. Why does UWM continue to provide a position for this woman? She embodies everything that is wrong with journalism today, and I am not just focusing on Faux News.

My Soda Has Zero Calories ... Nyah Nyah Nyah

I was heading back home from having picked up some goods at the local Pick n’ Save. Turned on the radio thinking I might catch the Brewers/Cardinals game and was shocked to hear the unmistakably shrill voice of Jessica McBride. Damn, rain delay.

So, I listened a bit, hard though it was on my ears. She was talking about State Senator Ted Kanavas’ gimmick of highlighting 30 different tax or fee increases during the month of April. All right, I thought. Big deal … I do like to know where my money is being spent, though I’m less needy than my conservative brethren ... so I decided to listen until I got home.

Apparently today, Kanavas highlighted a 2 cent increase on the cost of each can of soda … the revenue, estimated to be about $70 million, to be directed to a trust fund used to increase dental reimbursement rates.

I was turning into the driveway when Jessica started in on this, so wanting to hear what she would end up saying about the increase, I waited to turn the car off. She concluded by saying (paraphrasing) “I drink Coke Zero. There are no calories in Coke Zero. So I don’t want to have to pay for dental reimbursement for the poor because my soda doesn’t contribute to cavities.”

Two things struck me as odd about this.:

One: McBride must really dislike those less fortunate than her because she sure jumped on them pretty quickly. In fact, no where in Mr. Kanavas’ spiel was anything mentioned about the reimbursement being strictly for the poor.

Two: Calories have nothing to do with tooth decay.

Is McBride really this dumb?

(fyi: Diet colas don't contain sugars that cause tooth decay but they contain phosphoric acid. Acids can cause erosion in teeth. It’s different from decay, but can be just as bad. On the other hand, Coke Zero does contain aspartame, which some have linked to brain cancer. If true, that would explain much about McBride.)

Finally got to read Jessica McBride’s Waukesha Freeman column, courtesy a link by the Brew City Brawler. He deals with McBride’s “thuggery” in fine fashion. I’ll touch on those comments later. It’s the rest of her piece that begs for clarification.

Wow. It’s been an interesting week. First, the Democratic tsunami crashed and died on the electoral shore. It’s pretty much got the strength of the waves in a kiddie pool now.
Then, the Georgia Thompson "Travelgate" conviction got tossed, mucking the week up.
First the good news. Turns out the liberal tidal wave didn’t have staying power. At least, not in Wisconsin. That’s probably because, at least in this state, the midterm elections were more about Iraq and corruption by a former Florida congressman than they ever were about, well, Wisconsin. Yeah … midterms elections had nothing to do with Wisconsinites seeing through Mark Green’s non-disclosure of what he stood for
In their infinite wisdom, Wisconsin voters demonstrated this week that they are back to reality. They got it. This race was about preserving school choice, the gay marriage amendment, not restricting the powers of law enforcement officers to do their jobs and getting the judicial albatross off the back of business. No, this race was about electing a Supreme Court Justice who would rule objectively on cases, not be a pawn of the business community and conservatives. Actually … it was far more about Linda Clifford running a incredibly inept campaign. The only reason the election was as close as it was … because Ziegler was a flawed candidate and maybe 20% of the electorate voted. Face it, conservatives are able to energize their base better than liberals during April elections.
Conservatives can put away the post-midterm Prozac, although I was never one of those who cowered under the covers, concerned that conservatism had been repudiated. I never believed the midterms meant Wisconsinites wanted their taxes raised, criminals released and America to cower to Islamic fascist terrorists. The pendulum always swings back. Back to Bucher talking points. I thought this election was about Wisconsin, Jessie? Always count on Jessica to give herself the proverbial pat on the back. If anything, this gal is an expert at self aggrandizement.
The pendulum just swung back.
For one, voters demonstrated that they prefer conservative candidates in law enforcement positions. Conservative Annette Ziegler even won Milwaukee County. Historically, it’s been considered a coup for a conservative to neutralize Milwaukee County by winning 40 percent of the vote. Ziegler won Milwaukee County outright. This is a big deal. To win statewide, liberals need to run up the numbers in Milwaukee and Dane counties. For years, they’ve taken Milwaukee County for granted. No more. Scott Walker proved that on taxes. Now, this. Milwaukee County is up for grabs.
J.B. Van Hollen also performed well in that county for a conservative. Ziegler outperformed even him. The message: When it comes to positions with a law enforcement component, independents and even some Democrats prefer conservatives. Big surprise. The liberal approach to the violent crime problem is to advocate for the release of more prison inmates. The conservative approach? Well, it’s not to release prison inmates. Case closed. Well, that’s one of the more obscene generalizations I’ve ever read. If that’s the case, then liberals did real well in those areas not centered in Milwaukee or Madison during the last election. This one only kind of counts.

In addition, voters demonstrated Tuesday that the midterm vote was not a blank check for Democrats to raise their taxes.
They smacked down a gazillion dollar school referendum in the Elmbrook School District. They defeated spending referendums in Palmyra-Eagle and Delafield. They defeated a gargantuan school referendum in Franklin. They passed smaller referendums in other communities. The voters seemed to be saying: Don’t try to pull a bag over our heads. We can tell the difference between needs and wants. So, we were impatient about Iraq and hacked off about Mark Foley. Plus, we felt really sorry for Michael J. Fox. That didn’t mean we want our taxes jacked up. What is it with Jessica’s use of the words “smack down.” Me thinks she watches too much all-star wrestling. Though it would explain her limited vocabulary. And a couple of referendums get voted down. You know what, the amounts requested were rather large. I live in Brookfield and voted against the referendum. However, I am willing to listen when they come back asking for a more reasoned amount. It had nothing to do with “conservative thought.”
The voters also said again, resoundingly, that ethics matter. At least in Waukesha County. They showed Jefferson Davis the door in Menomonee Falls (I am sure my husband’s securing a criminal conviction against him played a role). The same Paul Bucher to whom Waukesha voters were so loyal … I guess it had something to do with his rabid partisanship and his wife’s egomania.
In contrast, in Milwaukee County, 6th Aldermanic District voters decided that ethics don’t matter by not recalling Alderman Michael Jackson McGee whatever his name is. Then again, that’s Milwaukee 6th District. Thugs voted for a thug. Hard to extrapolate that into a broader message. “Thugs voted for a thug.” For this, McBride should be fired. She impugns the entire 6th District.
Moving on to Georgia Thompson. A three-judge federal appellate panel burst the conservative giddy bubble and tossed her conviction this week. Actually, they did more than that: They ordered her acquittal and immediate release from federal prison, even before they committed their reasoning to paper.
The panel is not an example of liberals run amok. Two of the judges were Republican appointees. If you listen to the oral arguments, it’s clear they didn’t buy any element of the federal case. They didn’t think she had anything to gain. They didn’t buy that Adelman Travel hadn’t won the contract on its merits. They didn’t believe there were "significant" political connections between Gov. Jim Doyle and Adelman. They didn’t believe there was evidence of a political quid pro quo. In other words, they didn’t buy any of it.
They also supplanted their opinion for that of the 12-member jury, the grand jury and the federal judge in Milwaukee who presided over the case and found no reason to toss the conviction. This was a political arm-twisting from day one. But what is frightening is McBride’s total lack of any sentient humanity. It’s rude enough to be labeled “colorless.” But even McBride admits Ms Thompson had no clear motive. It was all about tarring Governor Doyle, and hoping that enough bad press would lift his opponent into the governor’s house.

McBride brushes aside the lost wages, lost home, lost job, lost four months of Ms Thompson’s life because:
Sometimes prosecutors put the screws to the mid-level player in an aggressive prosecution of an imperfect case because often such a player pleads out and flips on the real puppetmasters. But Georgia never flipped.
The final straw. McBride can’t even refer to this poor woman with respect, instead using her first name as though they are on good speaking terms.
Jessica McBride should be shown the door at UWM. She should be shown the door at WTMJ (like that will happen).


But, let’s be honest. Did anyone really believe Thompson was public enemy No. 1? That this colorless, apolitical career bureaucrat with no clear motive was the end game, as opposed to the means to get the prosecutor to the real target?
Aggressive prosecutors sometimes go down in flames. That’s because they take chances. They take on tough cases that, in the interest of justice, need to be brought. They don’t just take the easy road. If you want someone who punts on the tough cases, choose an E. Michael McCann. Or a Tom Schneider. Who?
If you asked that question, you proved my point. Schneider was the U.S. attorney before Steve Biskupic. He didn’t take chances. He didn’t ever go down in flames, as a result, over a high-profile case. He also didn’t do anything. On public corruption. On voter fraud. On police misconduct, you name it. He didn’t draw a societal line. He took the easy way out. Sometimes prosecutors put the screws to the mid-level player in an aggressive prosecution of an imperfect case because often such a player pleads out and flips on the real puppetmasters. But Georgia never flipped.Still, Biskupic? I’ll take his record any time.

Kurt Vonnegut

I was saddened to read that a childhood companion of mine, Kurt Vonnegut, has died at the age of 84, presumably of brain injuries suffered during a fall. I say a childhood friend because I remember reading "Player Piano" the first time just about the time I entered high school. Afterward, I read everything I could get my hands on written by Vonnegut. Vonnegut pushed the envelope ...

"He was a man who combined a wicked sense of humor and sort of steady moral compass, who was always sort of looking at the big picture of the things that were most important," said Joel Bleifuss, editor of In These Times, a liberal magazine based in Chicago that featured Vonnegut articles.

Some of Vonnegut's books were banned and burned for alleged obscenity. He took on censorship as an active member of the PEN writers' aid group and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The American Humanist Association, which promotes individual freedom, rational thought and scientific skepticism, made him its honorary president.

I hope in my life I can look back and know I rocked the boat just a bit and caused just a little uncomfortableness like Vonnegut did.


I really wonder what gives us the right to wreck this poor planet of ours. -- Kurt Vonnegut

Whallah!

I was considering keeping this secret, but then decided there was no point. I am going to have a t-shirt made with the word "Whallah" emblazoned across the chest in honor of our journalist wanna-be, Jessica McBride. If anyone is interested in their own t-shirt, either reply here or send me a note via e-mail (piratebat@wi.rr.com). Include size specs.

While I'm not too worried about the cost, some help will be appreciated. I will post the cost later after determining what it will be. Deadline for letting me know is next week Friday, April 20.

No Outrage

The price of gas hit $2.89 at the station around the corner. I asked the clerk inside if she had been getting complaints about the price and she said no. Has anyone else noticed the lack of outrage.

I remember just before the election how this was an issue guaranteed to inflame tempers. My only conclusion is that elections, that centerpiece of our democracy that should bring out the best in Americans, brings out the worst.

Daddy/Daughter Night Out

My youngest sister was lucky enough to come into four Admirals tickets for Friday night's game. She had one ticket to spare (she was going with her two boys) and asked if my son Ian would like to join them. Of course he jumped at the chance.

Unfortunately, this left out his younger sister, six-year old Abby. Well, daddy being free as well, he invited his beautiful daughter to join him for a dinner date at Pepinos. Abby took a bath. Kelly dried her hair and helped her get ready and when she was, she was even more astoundingly beautiful. I'm such a lucky dad.

I was very proud of Abby throughout dinner (which also included shakes from Culvers later). She was on her best manners. She said thank you, excuse me and please when appropriate. She did not interrupt the waiter while he was talking and was the perfect dinner guest.

I'll bet the other patrons saw how proud Abby's dada was of her.

It's a quiet morning ... the children are downstairs with their cousins Kiefer and Keaton. There has been only one difference of opinion, solved by bringing and extra blanket and pillow. The baby still sleeps though a few gurgles were heard through the baby monitor. Mom is sleeping as well, enjoying her day off - part of her part time work schedule.

Me? I've been involved in a free agency draft for one of the fantasy leagues I am in ... this one for which my team is the defending champion. It will be a one-year reign as the team has already been dissassembled, ala the Florida Marlins.

Bopping around the Internet, I saw this quote:

"Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives." -- Sunday Portland Oregonian

Hypocrites. I had been having discussions with a fellow named Tracy over at Boots and Sabers. We had been discussing speech and its limits. He is of the belief that pornography, abortion, etc. are all liberal inventions. Since the founding fathers envisioned the 1st Amendment to be a protection only for political speech, he said, anything else is a liberal assault on the true meaning of this amendment (paraphrasing).

Folkbum and Scott Feldstein joined in the fray ... all of us amazed at the shortsightedness of this fellow. No one I know likes pornography. It is a disgusting abuse of the human spirit. Of course, Tracy could not look past the child pornographers he apparently sees around every corner, courtesy of liberal thought. I wonder if he has ever given thought to the manipulated women. What circumstances caused themselves to expose their souls in such a hard and unsavory manner.

Yet, for all its inherent evil, the right to publish this is enshrined in the 1st Amendment. Because, if this was banned, what would be next?

Modeling for art classes? (And then next, government-sponsored art).
Erotic speech. Would Casanova
LiteratureArt in magazines not approved by the government. Magazines

s

A Quiet Morning

It's a quiet morning ... the children are downstairs with their cousins Kiefer and Keaton. There has been only one difference of opinion, solved by bringing an extra blanket and pillow. The baby still sleeps though a few gurgles were heard through the baby monitor. Mom is sleeping as well, enjoying her day off - part of her part time work schedule.

Me? I've been involved in a free agency draft for one of the fantasy leagues I am in ... this one for which my team is the defending champion. It will be a one-year reign as the team has already been dissassembled, ala the Florida Marlins.

Bopping around the Internet, I saw this quote:

"Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives." -- Sunday Portland Oregonian

Hypocrites.

I had been having discussions with a fellow named Tracy over at Boots and Sabers. We had been discussing speech and its limits. He is of the belief that pornography, abortion, etc. are all liberal inventions. Since the founding fathers envisioned the 1st Amendment to be a protection only for political speech, he said, anything else is a liberal assault on the true meaning of this amendment (paraphrasing).

Folkbum and Scott Feldstein joined in the fray ... all of us amazed at the shortsightedness of this fellow. No one I know likes pornography. It is a disgusting abuse of the human spirit. Of course, Tracy could not look past the child pornographers he apparently sees around every corner, courtesy of liberal thought. I wonder if he has ever given thought to the manipulated women and what circumstances caused themselves to expose their souls in such a hard and unsavory manner.

Yet, for all its inherent evil, the right to publish this crap is enshrined in the 1st Amendment. Because, if this was banned, what would be next?

Modeling for art classes? (And then next, government-sponsored art).
Erotic speech. Would Giacomo Casanova be banned.
Art literature magazines.
Magazines with erotic poetry.
Just modeling.
All non-government magazines.
All speech (unless approved).

It's not a complete slippery-slope list, but I hope you get the idea. There are laws to combat predators. Let the police do their job. Communities have the right to deny pornographers residency. The Internet presents a unique challenge. But I've got news for you, Tracy. There were child pornographers before the Internet and access to this trash can be purchased anywhere.

We need to be very cautious regarding any chipping away at our freedoms. Unfortunately, this adminstration and its many followers, like Tracy, are only too glad to wield a chisel.

Meanwhile, the children blissfully play in the basement and watch the Cartoon Network ... and the baby and her mommy sleep soundly upstairs. There is still much good in this world.

Happy Easter

Limbaugh Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize?

This was too funny. Media Matters reports that:

On the March 30 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, after noting that Ole Danbolt Mjos, the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize committee, reportedly "praise[d]" former Vice President Al Gore's efforts to draw attention to global warming, Rush Limbaugh declared: "I don't even know why Gore's qualified for this. ... I have done more for world peace to promote liberty and freedom than Al Gore has."

Limbaugh stated that he is "an accredited nominee this year for the Nobel Peace Prize" and asserted that it was "cheap" that "Gore's over there" in Norway "lobbying" for the award. He later said: "My lawyers at the Landmark Legal Foundation are looking into the possibility of filing an objection with the Nobel committee over the unethical tampering for this award that Al Gore is engaging in." In fact, according to a February 22 Associated Press report, Limbaugh's "nomination" by the Landmark Legal Foundation "appeared to" be "invalid" because the foundation may not have "nomination rights."

According to a March 29 Reuters article, Mjos attended a March 29 speech by Gore in Oslo, Norway, and afterwards "prais[ed]" Gore for advancing a "very important message" on the threat posed by rising global temperatures. Referring to the report, Limbaugh claimed: "Gore's over there lobbying. That's cheap. You're not supposed to lobby for this thing. You're supposed to have dignity. You're supposed to sit back there and let the selection process take its course." Limbaugh then offered himself as a contrast to Gore: "I'm not over there speaking to these people about anything" and asked: "What in the hell's global warming have to do with world peace?"

FYI: The president of the Landmark Legal Foundation is Mark Levin, a man who is nearly as outrageous as Michael (Weiner) Savage. Obviously, an institution with the merit to nominate Limbaugh … good grief.

The following was a response from a commenter anonymously named Neondesert at Media Matters. I thought it funny.

Dammed straight. I doubt anyone is more deserving of the award. His treatment of MS sufferers as equals by making fun of them just like anybody else is only scraping the surface.

Surely no one would deny that his promotion of his latino cleaning lady to the level of free-market pharmacist gives hope worldwide to minorities.

His efforts to keep Donovan McNabb from becoming a tool of the elitist media illustrates his dedication to blacks.

And nothing could indicate his desire for commerce in other countries more than spreading his personal fortune among the young adult boys in the Dominican Republic.

These constitute merely a snapshot of the good that Rush has done to promote peace in the world, I'm sure there are many more examples. Al Gore couldn't put together a resume that would even remotely equal that of Rush.

McIlheran Strikes Out Again

Pat McIlheran is such a putz. His post last night regarding “nasty campaigning” is just too funny, and misleading. The Journal Sentinel, he reports, sent a “cease and desist” letter” to the Linda Clifford campaign because a few people became confused thinking the newspaper was calling voters. Of course, if these people had not followed their natural inclination to hang up on all outside phone calls not made by families and friends, they would have discovered that the Clifford campaign clearly identified itself at the end of the message. Not enough for McIlheran who calls them to the front of the class for their "confusing" deception.

Of course, this minor transgression (if one) is far more serious than insinuating that Linda Clifford is somehow dirty … what was that line about “immigration lawyer?” Nothing like confusing the issue and piling on racist innuendo in support of your client. But I guess that’s okay in the beady eyes of McIlheran.

And then there is the “professional dirt digger” caper. We know that Republicans would never stoop that low to accommodate what is, truly, the reality of today’s political campaigns. Oh, wait … there is a professional dirt digger for Ziegler. His name is McIlheran. Evens.

And last, and least is the laughable accusation regarding the photographers who lied about their true mission. They should not have. But compared to breaking rules that govern the judiciary (Annette Ziegler did this), and finding it easy in her heart to sentence real sexual predators to incredibly lenient sentences (Annette Ziegler did this), lying about taking photos (Linda Clifford did not do this) is kind of silly.

Speaking of photos, wasn’t it Annette Ziegler who first played “catch me lying if you can” early in the campaign with her photos in front of courthouses around the state?

McIlheran, give it a rest, but thanks for the laugh. Oh, by the way, what is it with the brown sportscoat and red tie? Channeling Ernst Röhm?

Life at the End of the Universe

h/t Aaron at Subject to Change.


I got my name in lights with notcelebrity.co.uk