Saturday, April 30, 2005
My Magic Wand CBS Fix
H2 has challenged bloggers to come up with ideas that might help fix the CBS Evening News brand/image problem. This is a Herculean task, given the gaping wounds left by Rathergate, the increasingly hostile and biased 60 Minutes, and the lack of a trusted, recognizable anchor. Personally, I haven't watched CBS Evening News in, well, forever. B-O-R-I-N-G.
I agree with others who've said that by the time 6:30 has rolled around, many people have gotten their news from the internet, the 24 hour news channels, and talk radio. So what to offer those that still tune in? We can work with the assumption that in order to attract viewers, CBS will need to offer both flash and substance. Give viewers a reason to tune in. It's a fine line, but keep them just a little off balance. Report the day's news, and throw in some surprises. Have a host that smiles every now and then! I like the idea of doing the show from somewhere other than New York, LA, or Washington. This shouldn't be too difficult, given today's satellite technology. Most important is the idea that CBS needs to work under the assumption that their viewers are smart. Talking down to viewers will insult them and drive them away. A smart broadcast will attract smart viewers.
For a host, I like Larry Kudlow. He is a sharp guy, and will keep things moving quickly. What a difference compared to Rather! Kudlow is center-right, and has no problem disclosing this. He has had many bloggers (including Hugh) on his CNBC gig, and clearly understands the blogosphere (though I think it would signal an immediate departure from the past, I admit CBS would never hire someone who's pro-blogosphere, given the circumstances around Hurricane Dan's exit).
I like the daily panel discussion on FNC's Special Report, so why not copy it? All TV does these days is recycle ideas, so it's not a stretch. I have no problem with a 2 on 2 battle (liberal/conservative) with Kudlow moderating. Let everyone get their ideas out, then let viewers decide. Let's face it, we all have our opinions, so let's toss out the notion that CBS has been "objective." Similarly, toss the notion that all viewers want "objective" news. FNC's success proves this point.
Make the total broadcast an hour long, starting with 20 minutes of the days headlines. Give the panel the middle 20 minutes. End with a 10 minute segment with a blogger du jour, and wrap up with an honest representation of viewer feedback. Above all else, keep things moving. And give people a reason to laugh now and then.
I've outlined my CBS dream above, and I recognize fully that it will never happen. CBS is starting from scratch. They can continue their ratings slide by force feeding their news to liberal blue hairs, or they can embrace the future and start attracting middle America, younger and center-right viewers with a new approach. I hope for the latter, but expect the former.
UPDATE: 05/01/2005 @ 12:00pm: Special thanks to Hugh Hewitt for linking to this post. I appreciate it and welcome all H2's readers!
Vic Hanson is a Genius
Friday, April 29, 2005
Celebrity Sightings, Travel Edition
Muhammed Ali - ORD
LaVar Arrington - IAD
Gray Davis - IAD
Jim Boeheim - CLE
Quiet Riot - DFW
Doc Severinsen - LAX
US Men's National Rugby Team - CDG
New Zealand All Blacks - LAX
Tim Hardaway - MIA
Keri Russell - DFW
Zell Miller - LAS
Pat Buchanan - ORD
Bill MacDonald - LAS
Paul Prudomme - MSY
Eric La Salle - LAX
Nikki Sixx - LAX
This eclectic list is sure to grow, as there's a lot of business travel left on this year's calendar (and I may also remember some that I haven't yet listed)....
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Back on the Blog
Today was a terrible travel day, with weather delays, mind-numbing TSA stupidity, and abject rudeness from my fellow travelers. I normally avoid Boston's Logan Airport if at all possible, and today's experience provides me with no desire to go back. Long story short: As I was in the security line, 5 people decided they were too important to wait like the rest of us, so they cut the line. Minor annoyance, so I focused my chi and resumed the requisite "X-ray crawl." I approached the line's end, and was instructed to put a cup of coffee (Starbucks, paper cup) in the x-ray machine. Then I was told to take off my sneakers, which ticked me off a little since not all airports require this, and TSA is supposed to be consistent on their procedures. More chi. More focus.
So the cup went into the scanner and a puddle of steamy java came out. Then two other TSA guys started yelling at me before I pointed them to one of their own colleagues. He tried to blame me at first, then after I stood up for myself (and the truth), he admitted that he had told me to put the coffee on the conveyer belt. The other TSA chowderheads then started (rightfully) yelling at him, because that line had to be shut down for conveyer belt cleaning and they were all worried that coffee might get into the x-ray equipment. It was a big mess. There were probably between 100-200 people who were in line behind me, now stranded. So I go to my beloved Red Carpet Club, hoping to get online with their wireless HotSpot, only to find that at that location, the airport's pay-as-you-go network is the only one available. Ugh, only at Logan! I didn't feel like spending another $8, another minor annoyance. Not a fun day.
Tonight I arrived to my hotel just in time for this week's surprising American Idol results. Somehow, some way, Scott and Anthony both avoided the axe once again. I'm considering a reassignment of the "Undead Radioactive Singing Cockroach" moniker to one of those two clowns. Constantine, in a shocker, went down like a chump. Though I was never a big fan of his, Constantine's performance last night was truly wretched. I believe that Scott and Anthony both have less talent, but oh well, the tribe has spoken. With five to go, my prediction for the final will be Carrie and Vonzell, in that order. Bo finishes third. Take it to the bank.
Sunday, April 24, 2005
I'm going with the bocce lesson. Shane and Bryce must learn. Sorry, but that was just so much fun.
M3C BOTW XII
I continue to marvel at the outright disregard for honesty that the MSM demonstrates. It's so transparent and I have to admit chuckling every time I hear a bright-eyed journalism major proudly exclaim their reasons for going into the profession: "To change the world" or "To make a difference."
Just. Report. The. Damn. News. Please. That's what a real journalist does.
I expect very light blogging this week (as if the past few days were just the opposite). Keep checking back, I've got my camera with me so I hope to get some good pictures of springtime in New England. I remembered to bring the USB cable too (finally!).
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
A.I. Viewers Vote to Drill Anwar
AnWar is not the answer.
Hillary in the News
The second piece I read was actually speculating about Newt Gingrich's presidential aspirations, however, Gingrich himself has made the prediction that Hillary will be the Democratic nominee in 2008.
And today we see that Hillary has raised more money than any Senator (so far) for next year's senatorial races. This is not really news, as the Clintons have always been excellent fundraisers. But pragmatically speaking, money drives politics, and having a lot of money always helps. So that's something we shouldn't underestimate. And (for reasons beyond me) Hillary has a lot of passionate supporters, a luxury that John Kerry never really enjoyed. Yet Kerry garnered a huge number of votes, over 59 million total. So could a candidate with a very passionate core of supporters, aided by a huge war chest, win the presidency in 2008? Perhaps.
I'm waiting on my copy of The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. But from the excerpts I've already read, the Democrats were highly organized last election. The various 527s are passionate, extremely well-financed, and highly motivated (sometimes by the wrong emotions, but motivated nonetheless). We know the MSM will be effusive with their praise for her. Time will tell if Hillary can put together a disciplined coalition. Despite her failings, I don't think we should underestimate her chances of becoming president. It will take a seriousness of purpose and a lot of hard work, but she can be defeated.
UPDATE: I originally intended to publish this piece yesterday (Tuesday), but I had problems with the Blogger mothership and it literally ate portions of this post. It's been reconstructed for the most part, but I just wanted to get it out rather than change all the dates and times, etc.
Sometimes I Don't Feel the Love
I have no problem with honest, intellectual debate with anyone, even if one or both parties is factually challenged. I just can't understand getting this worked up about a man, literally within hours of him taking a new job. We have a huge problem in this country with the abject hatred and just plain nastiness on the left. I hoped things had peaked during the last election, but I fear it's worse now, if that's even possible. My solution (and one guaranteed to make them even angrier) is to smile, forgive them, and maybe pray a little.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Monday, April 18, 2005
Anderson bends over backwards to present the liberal explanation for Air America's underperformance:
So why do liberals fare so poorly on air? Some on the left say it's because liberals are, well, smarter and can't convey their sophisticated ideas to the rubes who listen to talk radio.Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Though Anderson ably defends conservatives on this point, of course I want to add My Three Cents: liberals will continue lose elections as long as they underestimate their opponents (I'm working on another piece that covers this topic--more weird timing). And if liberals is so derned smart, how comes they keep losing elections to all those stoopid rube who all time votes conservatives"?
Of course, those paying attention will remember how I mocked Air America three weeks ago. But it looks like things are worse for the liberal radio network (now one year old) than even I could have hoped. Anderson reports that Air America is losing roughly $8 million a year, and is near last in the ratings in all of the major markets. It's just a matter of time before they're toast, folks. Read Anderson's piece, it's very interesting. Then cue the dirge.
Wes Roth, Moving On Up
M3C BOTW XI
In all seriousness, there's much to enjoy at Wizbang!. Check them out when you have a chance. You'll find good humor, sound political views, and timely news links. They have their [expletive deleted] together.
Saturday, April 16, 2005
Gravy Train Update
Why the Democrats have chosen to make a stink about who Tom DeLay has on the payroll is beyond me. Clearly, many members of both parties employ their family members, and it isn't (as far as I can tell) against the rules. Did the Democrats just assume that no one was going to check out what they are up to? Have they heard of that thing called the blogosphere? This seems like such a non-issue to me, I must be missing something.
Friday, April 15, 2005
Another Call to Action
Hugh Hewitt has dedicated the entire week, both on his blog and his radio show, to covering the issue of judicial filibusters. Last night he suggested (here) contacting Republican Senators that may be wobbly on the issue. I consider this issue more important than the Terri Schiavo matter (and tangentially related, by the way). I urged action then, and I do so again today. H2's quote:
The seven Republican senators thought to be on the fence about ending the filibuster: Alexander, Chafee, Collins, Hagel, Snowe, Sununu and Warner. Here's the contact info.Polite firmness and civility is key. We want results. We do not want to stoop to childish tactics like throwing pies and tantrums comparing wafflers to fascist dictators. I have some more thoughts on the politics of this, which I'll save for later. Now is the time for people to make a few phone calls and/or send out some e-mails. Hopefully some of you will take me up on this challenge.
Calls to the Congressional switchboard, 202-225-3121, can also link you to Senator Frist's office where you can politely urge that a vote on ending the abuse of the filibuster be scheduled, announced, and defended.
If it turns out that some of the Senate's Republican wafflers vote with the Democrats, then later we can discuss punishing them (via the ballot box). As Mr. Hewitt says, there is no point in having a Republican majority if they aren't going to push the Republican agenda (an agenda they promised and were elected to advocate, by the way).
To close, I want to make it clear that I try to be very cautious in picking and choosing causes to get behind. I don't ask anyone to do anything I'm not willing to do myself. And I don't want to waste anyone's time by asking readers to take action on frivolous causes. In other words, it is my fervent belief that this is one of those rare and important issues where we as citizens need to do that which is right. I hope you will agree and thanks to all for their help.
Thursday, April 14, 2005
I Knew There was a Reason for the Spike in Traffic
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
In January, Boxer protested Bush's election certification and threatened to hold up proceedings until "voter disenfranchisement issues" in Ohio were resolved. Frank Salvato described Boxer's tantrum (found here) as a "waste of time and taxpayer money on a political stunt." Salvato continues by calling it "an unethical, albeit constitutional, narcissistic desire for attention and political divisiveness." I couldn't agree more. All I would add is that we can expect a lot more of her shenanigans in the future because Boxer is from a very blue state and she doesn't have to face the voters again until 2010. That's the perfect scenario for obstructionist Senators (unlike Tom Daschle, who was up for re-election last year in a very red state. He lost.)
Babs wasn't finished embarrassing herself in January, though, with her objection to Bush's certification. Remember her shameful and pompous grandstanding at Condoleeza Rice's Senate confirmation hearings at the end of January. Another shining example of "a narcissistic desire for attention" at a time when Rice's confirmation was never in question. So much for bipartisanship, eh Senator?
In the "guilt by association" department, let's not overlook who Michael Moore supports.
Last month Boxer went to go visit troops in the Middle East. Here's a photo of her with some young Marines. None of the Marines look too pleased to be lunching with Boxer, but perhaps that's just my own bias creeping in. Or maybe it's because they know how vocal she's been in opposition to the "unilateral war" in which they risk their lives on a daily basis. Or maybe they've just surfed over to MichaelMoore.com. Oh, before anyone accuses me of harvesting this picture from an extremist right wing website, I'll save you some time and link to where I got it, found right here. Judge for yourself:
Senator Boxer's Marine Corps. photo-op
Last week, Boxer threatened to hold up confirmation of Stephen L. Johnson, President Bush's choice to lead the EPA. More narcissism . More obstructionism (see a pattern yet?) This time, the issue for Boxer was a little known program where everyday people are paid so the pesticide industry (American Chemistry Council) can measure the effects (if there are any) of pesticide use on children. Basically, people were paid to go about their normal lives and then let some scientists take samples every 3-6 months. They were never told or even encouraged to change their regular habits. Of course, the facts about the program's true nature didn't stop Boxer from lying about it on her website, where she described it as "an immoral program to test pesticides on children." Read the EPA link and show me where the immorality is! Their PDF dictates the exact opposite, in fact. Boxer makes it sound as if George Bush himself concocted some Saddam-like chemistry torture test where the eyelids of loving parents are forced open with toothpicks so they must watch their little babies ("of color" no less) get dipped into flaming vats of DDT while evil, laughing Republicans in white lab coats record (and then gamble on) the results.
If we go further back in time, to last year, for example, we find that on the floor of the Senate Barbara Boxer referred to the Madrid train bombings (an Al Qaeda act of terror) as a "rail accident." So I guess, using her terminology, the World Trade Center collapsed as a result of an "aerial accident?" Nothing criminal here, but I provide this statement as more evidence of Boxer's utter lack of competence (not to mention her insensitivity towards the Madrid bombing victims) when it comes to holding elected office. To steal Charles Johnson's term, Boxer is an "idiotarian."
Of course, before she became a Senator, Barbara Boxer was a representative from California. She holds the great distinction of "second most prolific writer of bad checks" (bouncing 143 checks over 39 months, totaling $41,417) in the house banking scandal of 1992. A crime that would land any one of us in prison for a very long time apparently (in California, anyway) enables San Francisco liberals to elevate themselves to the greatest deliberative body in the world, the U.S. Senate. But, according to Barbara Boxer, that's "none of your business." I could go on forever, but I think you get the picture.
On to the matter at hand, the aforementioned solicitation of help from MSM newspapers. Though I linked it above, here are some key quotes, with some M3C analysis thrown in to aid digestion.
"You need to explain why a vocal minority in the Congress is essential for a democracy and why it is essential for you," she told several hundred editors at the opening session of the American Society of Newspaper Editors conference.
A "vocal minority" is essential for democracy? Since when? I thought free and fair elections were essential for democracy. I thought an atmosphere where an opposition can exist is essential. I'm willing to bet that if everyone agreed with Boxer's view of the world, her desire to create and protect a vocal minority would evaporate. And should I even comment on media bias when a hard-core liberal like Barbara Boxer is the opening speaker for the American Society of Newspaper Editors? Since they have invited her to speak, can we put to rest the notion that they are objective?
When asked later what newspapers should specifically do to highlight the issue, Boxer pointed to both news coverage and editorials explaining the effect of limited filibusters. "I think editorials would be very helpful," Boxer told E&P. "When people hear filibuster, they don't get what it really means. It would be helpful because the press understands it."
Yes, the press understands that which the stupid voters don't. If the stupid voters understood what filibusters are, then they would rise up and no longer be a "vocal minority." So Boxer enlists her friends in the press to help.
Boxer cited the efforts by Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), the House Minority Leader, and others in the GOP to weaken minority-party rights, as well as DeLay's threats to impeach judges who have gone against his views. She said newspapers need to cover both issues closely so that readers can remain informed, but also so newspapers can protect their own freedoms.
Boxer cleverly uses the Democratic playbook here: use every issue as an opportunity to demonize Tom DeLay. No specifics here as to what it is exactly DeLay is doing, of course. However, I'm still a little confused how Tom DeLay (a House Representative) can somehow influence Senate politics. I know he's the moonbats' poster child for evil, but this is a stretch, don't you think? For the record, DeLay has called for impeaching judges that ignore the law. That's very different than impeaching judges that "go against his views" and it seems perfectly acceptable to me. As a side note, I think the lazy E&P writer missed the fact that DeLay is House Majority Leader; it's the Democrats who are in the minority, and their leader is Nancy Pelosi.
"They're going after judges, they're going after the filibuster, and it is dangerous," she told the news leaders. "You have a dog in that fight. Your whole basis of what you do is exercising that freedom of speech. These checks and balances are crucial for all of us. We exercise them."
Yes, the old "freedom of expression" canard. Yawn. The press' "dog in the fight" is the Democratic party, who they almost monolithically support. Republicans may go after (they haven't yet) a filibuster which is being misused, a filibuster of judges which is not spelled out in the Constitution. That means it's unconstitutional, and something all honest Senators should oppose.
"There is a big story to be told out there, and I hope you will tell it as you see it. ... They are going to change the rules of the Senate that have been around for 200 years. These rights are important, this leverage is important. And your rights to tell stories the way you want are in many ways tied to this. You are in this battle."
"Tell it as you see it?" She's asking them to tell it as she sees it! That's the point of her speech, and this article, so spread the word, editors! And the fact is that Democrats are using filibusters to oppose judicial appointments, a tactic until now, never used in 200 years. She has the facts completely wrong, clearly an effort to help shape public opinion.
Boxer also pointed to the War in Iraq, reminding editors that one of the Republican arguments for being in Iraq is to give the citizens their freedom. "I think it will fall on deaf ears if we don't protect freedom of expression here at home, or minority rights," she said. "I've always believed it to be patriotic to speak out, even when you are alone. It isn't fun, but it is necessary to do."
Yes, all those people being locked up for expressing their anti-Bush views is astounding, isn't it? Just how many have there been, Senator? While you're at it, tell us how many Americans (here in the U.S.) are dying from roadside bombs, IEDs and suicide bombers.
That's it. I rest my case. It's a lovely day here, our weather is making up for all that rain we had this winter. And I'm ready for a beer.....
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Saying One Thing, Doing Another
M3C BOTW X
Sorry for the light blogging today, folks. I could leave you with all the usual excuses but who cares about that stuff anyway? I would, however, like to throw out a special "shout out" to Enzo's dad. Hope to see you this weekend!
Monday, April 11, 2005
Answering Mr. Fantasy Man
how true. it is fortunate for us democrats that the republicans have taken their "moral stance", rolled it up, and smoked it. even figures like dobson are starting to get concerned. have you read what newt geignrich is saying? he's pretty embarrased about the whole re-writing the ethics rules to accomodate delay's lifestyle thing. not to mention the lack of WMD, the economy, social security, international relations, and education...you won't see a republican house, senate, and president for another 100 years. and it's all their own doing. that's the beauty of it...the democrats (as you have pointed out)couldn't find their ass with both hands and a flashlight, but they'll still win the next one after these embarrasments.Can someone please explain (Ceci, perhaps, if he sees this) which of the "issues" he lists that weren't around before the last election? It seemed all John Kerry did was hector us about "the worst economy since Herbert Hoover" and how "Bush's arrogance in leading the unilateral war in Iraq has alienated us from our allies." MoveOn.org reminded us in commercial after commercial how "Bush Lied, People Died" (a WMD reference). If those issues didn't matter last November, why will they next year?
Here's another great Michael Barone analysis of "The Hardest Numbers." Sorry, Ceci, but I trust that man's analysis of numbers and facts over yours of emotion and wishful thinking. Here's a key quote from Barone's piece, I'll leave it up to everyone to read the whole thing for more detail:
The implications? In the long run, Republicans are well positioned to increase their numbers in both the Senate and the House. Some Democrats hold seats because of personal popularity or moderate voting records. But when they retire, Republicans may well succeed them. In the short run, very few Republicans run great political risks by supporting Bush. Significantly more Democrats run great political risks by opposing him. Obstruction doesn't work well for Democrats in Bush seats: Just ask former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. And at the moment, on Social Security, as Democrats Stan Greenberg and James Carville wrote last month, "Voters are looking for reform, change and new ideas, but Democrats seem stuck in concrete."
I agree with Michael Barone, the next election, in some ways, is eons away. A lot can happen between now and November 2006. But the Democrats, currently lacking any message beyond their opposition to Bush's proposals, and with far more seats at risk in red-states as compared to Republican seats at risk in blue states, have their work cut out for them. I'm not saying the Republicans will have an easy time of it, but predicting sweeping Democrat victories is simply not realistic.
To make a statement that we won't see "another Republican House, Senate, or President for another 100 years" is nothing more than the most foolish of left-wing fantasies. If there's anyone alive today still voting on issues that are 100 years old, then I might be inclined to agree with Ceci. And if I thought I'd be around in 100 years to collect on the debt, then I'd wager house mortgages that his prediction won't come true.
UPDATE: 4/11/2005 9:36pm: Here's another excerpt from Byron York's Book, "The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy."
I Hope Paul Krugman is Next
Sunday, April 10, 2005
Coffee Geek "Has a Plan"
- Fill pot with filtered tap water (filtering removes chlorine taste). I can't bring myself to use bottled water, that seems a bit excessive.
- Bring water to a low boil. Ideal temperature is between 190-200 degrees F.
- Pre-heat a stainless steel vacuum insulated coffee cup with boiling water (pre-heating can take 5-10 minutes, I do it first to save time. The cup warms up as the coffee steeps).
- As water comes to a boil, grind fresh, whole coffee beans (1 rounded tablespoon of beans per 4 oz. water).
- Dump freshly ground beans into coffee press.
- Pour water into press, then quickly stir mixture with a small wooden or plastic spoon (metal could crack the press' glass vessel).
- Place lid on top to keep heat in.
- Let it steep for 4 minutes (I set a timer). Watch for the bloom!
- Push down plunger slowly and evenly.
- Dump pre-heated water first, then pour fresh coffee into the vacuum insulated cup.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
I Love the Internet
Among his assorted brilliance, Lileks links to this. All of a sudden I'm in a good mood again.
The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy
I'm fascinated by politics, the gamesmanship, the intrigue, and the passion of people on all sides. And I admit that I may have underestimated the Left's organizational effort last year. The excerpts I've linked above show a highly organized and motivated movement. I want to pick up "The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" to learn more. The money spent was absolutely mind-boggling (George Soros alone spent $25 million to try and unseat George W. Bush). As far as intrigue goes, the Democrats actually (somehow) acquired a CD-ROM Karl Rove's secret campaign plans! How they failed to win anything substantial in November can only boil down to a few possibilities: 1) John Kerry's utter lack of likability, 2) The party's lack of a substantive message (other than "We hate Bush!"), and 3) The profound distrust many Americans have for the Democrats in a time of war.
More to follow once I finish the read....
Friday, April 08, 2005
That's the Plan, Howard?
Second thought: The Democrats (and their 527 friends) spent more money than any campaign in history last election cycle, and they still lost seats in both the Senate and House, to go along with failing to win back the White House. So their first reaction is to go back to the same old playbook and spend more money. Heh.
Now, in all honesty, I must close with the following thoughts. I'm not happy with the amount of money the Republican-controlled government is spending these days. I don't think for a minute that things would be better if the Dems had control, though. Quite the contrary. The Republicans have some work to do (and fast) in getting control of the Senate judicial filibusters, mopping up Iraq and Afghanistan, the GWOT, and then they will need to rein in budget spending so they can lower my taxes.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Pass the Hand Sanitizer, Please
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
This Time it's for Good
Quandary for the MSM
Who does the MSM support in this effort? Clearly, President Bush doesn't like the Minuteman Project, calling them "vigilantes." And the press doesn't like President Bush, that's a well-documented fact. But the press also doesn't like the Minutemen (this article refers to them as "racists"). So who will the press support in this debate? How are they going to inject their bias into a story where both sides (in their view) are a problem?
A Thousand Thanks
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Lately it seems that the meaning of the word as been hijacked. The definition of tolerance is not: "You are a bigot unless you agree with me." I think it's fair to have honest, thoughtful disagreement on any issue. Even if someone isn't breaking the law, or somehow hurting another individual, we should be free to disagree with their beliefs (or actions) and even pass judgment without being called a fascist or being accused of "imposing one's belief" on someone else. In other words, I think it takes things too far to ask someone to openly embrace a practice or policy at the risk of being called intolerant (or something worse).
My thoughts on this issue are incomplete, but I marvel at how hostile (and how quickly that hostility manifests itself) some people in our society get when it comes to discussing morals, values, and religion. It's been "out there" for some time now, but I'm reminded of it again with all the coverage of Pope John Paul II's passing. I'm a little short on time today, so I'm going to leave it like this for the moment.
Monday, April 04, 2005
Terri Schiavo Afterthoughts
The tip of the iceberg is found here, a poll by Zogby International (hat tip: PowerLine). I'm going to predict big problems for the politicians who did nothing for Terri Schiavo, and another black eye for the MSM, who once again failed to get a big story correct.
UPDATE: 4/4/2005 7:50am: Heh. As soon as I post something I find more information. Hugh Hewitt linked an article this morning that is a must-read. It's written by John Leo for U.S. News & World Report, called "End of the Affair." Here's a few samples:
The behavior of conservatives: Uneven and sometimes awful, with lots of vituperation and extreme charges.Read the whole thing. Maybe this will be even more of a black eye for the media than I originally thought.
The behavior of liberals: Mystifying. While conservative opinion was severely splintered, liberal opinion seemed monolithic: Let her die.
The behavior of the news media: Terrible. "Pro-life" columnist Nat Hentoff of the Village Voice called it "the worst case of liberal media bias I've seen yet."
Sunday, April 03, 2005
Utah Flyfishing, Fun for the Whole Family
Dad battling another big Brown trout.
We were blessed with wonderful weather and spectacular scenery. It's amazing what clear skies and snowcapped mountains do one's outlook on life. I'll be on the road this week again for work, so this weekend was great for decompressing before having to face the airport crowds and TSA dolts.
One very nice Brown trout.