Mount Virtus

As the year 2004 winds down, it’s fair to continue asking the question: what did the opposition party learn from its national electoral defeat?

Those hopeful that the Democrats are willing to listen, stand up, and take “Red State” America seriously have at least three “wise men” on their side to cheer their hopes, the Washington Times editorializes today. Most notable is former Congressman Tim Roemer of Indiana, a possible candidate for the Democratic National Committee chairmanship. According to the Times, Roemer “had a strong pro-life voting record in the House” and has garnered support both from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid AND House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Interesting.

How this sort of thing would go over with the cloistered liberal elites in academia and elsewhere is less certain. I don’t think many Berkeley or Boulder profs will be hailing Roemer as a wise man. Witness a Dec. 28 column in the Rocky Mountain News by University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos, who lauds Thomas Frank’s books One Market Under God and What’s the Matter with Kansas? as though either of them had just hit the shelves of bookstores nationwide. No matter. Campos and others are searching for rationalizations to explain the results of the 2004 election - the rejection of John Kerry and the Vietnam-era anti-war and welfare-state politics his coalition represented.

In one compelling section of his column, Campos writes:

If not for insufferably arrogant government liberals, with their love for high taxes and burdensome regulations, not to mention their support for labor unions and the shiftless poor, every American deserving of wealth - that is, every hard-working American - would already be living in Mission Hills, or some place like it.

That, in an only slightly simplified form, is the message Republicans from Ronald Reagan onward have been selling so successfully for decades now. Frank calls this “market populism,” and in One Market Under God he strives to explain how a message so ridiculous on its face could have been so successful.

What’s the Matter With Kansas? tackles a related issue: How the Republican Party manages to hold together a coalition made up of, to put it as tactfully as possible, snake-handling fundie freaks and those who accept Milton Friedman as their personal lord and savior.

Such endearing terms. The Campos/Frank national electoral strategy probably wouldn’t involve too many stops in “fly-over country.”

To be fair, the law prof doesn’t necessarily endorse Frank’s theses. But his column ends with just the wrong sort of question to ask for Democrats who are looking to get themselves off the mat:

In any case, whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, Frank asks exactly the right question: How did a nation that enacted the New Deal and the Great Society come to want to transform itself into the equivalent of a Country Club Christian Church?

Looking ahead to 2005, I sense a bit of turmoil within the ranks of the Democratic Party. Where it leads will be an interesting development to follow.

High Chamberlain Hugh Hewitt continues to lead the campaign against the crumbling old media citadel with this powerful broadside in the Weekly Standard. His Theory of Asymmetrical Tolerance attempts to explain “how the old media went left into a deep ditch of agenda journalism, forfeiting the trust of a large portion of their audience and, in the process, opening the door to Rush Limbaugh, the second generation of radio talkers, Fox News, and, of course, the blogs.”

Hugh has been at the forefront of promoting the power of blogs to completely obliterate the old media’s monopolized grasp on controlling the flow of information. On his radio show of late, he has been continually touting figures showing the blogosphere’s ranks surpassing 5 million. His goal? To double that number by the end of 2005.

Hugh continues to do a great service to the blogosphere, actively recruiting to swell the ranks of the critical, independent-minded, skilled, opinionated, and often pajama-clad citizens at their computers keeping collective eyes on agenda journalism and holding it to public account. What a privilege to be part of this growing army for more than 10 months now (even if I almost never blog in my pajamas)! If you don’t have your own blog yet, why not?

Go and pre-order a copy of Hugh’s new book Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation that is Changing Your World. It’s on my Christmas/Birthday list, and should I not receive it within the next 10 days as a gift, I’ll be purchasing myself a copy posthaste. Not a bad idea. (Go now! For some reason, Blog has dipped to #99 on the Amazon bestsellers list.)

Towards the end of his Weekly Standard piece, Hugh offers a suggested list of questions journalists should have to answer in the interest of full disclosure, a way to make transparent and combat the effects of agenda journalism. Well, in the interest of full disclosure, I’ve decided to answer them myself:

“For whom did the reporter vote for president in the past five elections?”
2004 - Bush
2000 - Bush
1996 - Dole
1992 - too young (supported Bush)
1988 - too young (supported Bush)

“Do they attend church regularly and if so, in which denomination?”
Yes. Baptist.

“Do they believe that the late-term abortion procedure known as partial-birth abortion should be legal?”
No.

“Do they believe same sex marriage ought to be legal?”
No.

“Did they support the invasion of Iraq?”
Yes.

“Do they support drilling in ANWR?”
Yes.

But you probably already know where I’m coming from. Vive la blogosphere!

Though it is not always the case, the debate between Darwinian evolutionary biologists and advocates of Intelligent Design can be very rich and insightful.

Rand Simberg and John Mark Reynolds have started an exchange. We can only hope the dialogue continues. Reynolds has a lot of thoughtful and eloquent things to say - here’s just a snippet to whet the appetite:

I once was a theistic evolutionist. My faith did not demand I abandon Darwin, but my best reason did. Plato had more to do with changing my mind than Genesis. Still, if Genesis had motivated me, I see no reason to apologize for it. It is a book of great genius (see the previous post) and persons who dismiss it lightly are likely merely engaging in chronological snobbery, the belief that new is always better than old.

Go ahead and read their arguments. It’s a very thought-provoking debate. Learn, engage, participate.

Also check out Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost.

Hat tip to Hugh.

And now for something completely different… It seems that Clay - along with myself and many others - has been scammed by the Web-controlled Christmas lights hoax. Ho, ho, ho! And let the race begin for some computer geek to put such a system into place for real.

Can’t think of a reason to read about the Independence Institute’s public service message to Colorado teachers? Maybe if you know the author… I wrote about the same topic for the Colorado Springs Gazette (sadly, no link available).

Are you a public school teacher? Is a loved one, family member or friend? Point them to II’s teacher resource page.

Meditations on the meaning of Christmas - the Incarnation of Christ and His First Advent upon earth. Most marvelous and incomprehensible, and it’s just the beginning of the story!

All quotes taken from the New American Standard Bible
Read the rest of this entry »

Three cheers to New Hampshire’s Manchester Union-Leader for today’s editorial titled “Suing for Jesus: Christians Fight Back to Defend Christmas.”

The conclusion of the essay is right on, showing that common sense has not completely escaped America’s newsrooms:

Rather than accept their exile, [Christians] are demanding the rights they have as taxpayers and citizens, ironically using the same methods the secular left used to remove them from public view in the first place.

Defending the rights of a minority being ill-treated by the government would be a natural step for the ACLU if it were still the American Civil Liberties Union and not the Anti-Christian Libertines Union. But it is conspicuously absent in this fight. Christians are having to turn to their own public interest law firms.

There are multiple religious and secular celebrations this time of year. Christmas, short for Christ’s Mass, is the biggest and most widely celebrated. It is up to Christians to remind government officials who want to remove Christmas from the Christmas season that they are citizens too and that acknowledging their holy day does not constitute a violation of the rights of others.

Hat tip to Real Clear Politics.

I don’t know how many of you have been following the ongoing saga of the gubernatorial race recount in Washington state, but it makes for fascinating insights into what lengths the Democratic party will go to win an election… after it’s over.

I couldn’t possibly summarize all the developments that have taken place there. I’ve been checking articles from the Seattle papers on an almost daily basis. The latest article reports that the state Democratic party is prematurely declaring victory.

After several counts, Republican candidate Dino Rossi has been in the lead every time, though Democrats in King County keep magically finding new votes to trim the lead smaller and smaller. Now that they may have manufactured a scenario giving their candidate - Christine Gregoire - an 8-vote victory, I’m sure they’ll be content at that point that no one has been disenfranchised.

For absolutely sterling analysis of unfolding events in Washington state, for a serious breakdown of statistical data and some substantial voter registration research, check out Sound Politics. It’s the latest example of a team of bloggers absolutely schooling the MSM.

And, to my interested amazement, I’ve learned that I went to college with the daughter and son-in-law of one of the contributors. In fact, just last week we sent a Christmas letter to Chris and Heidi and little Madeline. Before they were parents, married, or even dating each other, I was good friends with Chris and Heidi and worked together with them on the campus newspaper. What a small world this wonderful blogosphere is!

A merry Christmas to all!

Another sign of the Bowl Championship Series’ imminent demise? Every true college football fan - and every lover of decency and good order - certainly hopes so.

It’s not often this blog gives its kudos to the Associated Press. Savor the moment.

Included in the 6 things not to talk about at family holiday gatherings? Religion. Sigh….

In a similar spirit, let me recommend to you a new politically correct greeting for the season - one likely not to offend pagans, secularists, Jews, Muslims, or any other oppressed minority, and without the vanilla sound of “Happy Holidays” - Happy Solramakwanukmas!

But then there’s more ridiculousness with the Quote of the Day:

“I’m just sick and tired of the Christian people thinking they can co-opt all of Christmas.” - Robert Tiernan, a Denver lawyer representing the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation

“Where’s the conservative leadership?” That’s what many Colorado Republicans will be crying out for as 2005 rolls around - maybe even before they’ve finished digesting the turkey sandwiches and fruitcake.

Yesterday Gov. Bill Owens announced his compromise plan to fix the state’s ongoing fiscal crisis. It includes a small tax cut and the state selling its share of the tobacco-settlement plan, not to mention a $500 million “de-Brucing” (allowing the state to keep revenues mandated by TABOR to be refunded to Colorado taxpayers).

But here’s the kicker:

Conspicuously absent from Owens’ proposal were changes to Amendment 23, which requires annual spending increases in K-12 education. For the past year, Owens had insisted that any changes to TABOR must be coupled with changes to Amendment 23.

The new Democratic legislative leadership and the failure to find common ground during the first eight months of this year led to Owens’ new proposal.

“I don’t see much willingness to address Amendment 23 this year. I would be willing to address it,” Owens said.

The #1 problem for the state’s fiscal train wreck is the four-year-old constitutional amendment requiring a growing percentage of the state’s expenditures finance K-12 public education. It’s the sacred cow of the state’s teachers’ union lobby - led by the Colorado Education Association (CEA).

Read the rest of this entry »

Following in the footsteps of Schroeder, perhaps my favorite Peanuts cartoon character, today (approximately… most historians believe somewhere between the 15th and 17th) we celebrate the birthday of the great composer Ludwig van Beethoven.

Beethoven was born in Bonn, Germany, one of 7 children - only 3 survived past infancy - to a court musician and his wife. His accomplishments, achievements, and his pure genius are hard to recount here without making some serious oversights. Nevertheless, anyone with serious appreciation for good music is familiar with a number of his works.

Beethoven was radical for his time and broke ground with his composition style. He ushered in the Romantic era of great music. Many of his symphonies are priceless treasures, some of which have been played and caricatured so much (especially the 5th) that they deserve a status all their own.

But let me tell you why Schroeder and I both take a few moments to celebrate Beethoven’s birthday. (Today would be his 234th, by my reckoning.) Few things in the world are as cathartic and as relieving of stress as pounding out a good Beethoven piano sonata. Angry how your boss treated you at work? Had a rough ride home in bumper-to-bumper traffic? Sit down and play through the first movement of the “Pathetique” (not perfectly, of course) and find the strain melting away.

Beethoven tapped a deep nerve in human feeling and passion. Try sitting alone in a room and listening to his 7th Symphony - no, really listening - and not be overswept with emotion. Powerful stuff. A powerful gift. The result of the gradual onset of deafness, broken relationships, and a general emotional instability.

A caveat: Beethoven’s birthday also reminds me that genius is not necessarily greatness. Gifts like his are rare, indeed; but the true “genius” of life is finding God’s purpose and God’s peace. This really has priority. Because compared with our Creator, the smartest among us comes far short of what the average garden slug is compared with our own intelligence.

A happy thought for a snowy December day!

Fox News has reported that the ACLU is suing a rural Pennsylvania school board for allowing the teaching of intelligent design alongside the teaching of biological evolution in the classroom.

The ACLU said its lawsuit will be the first to challenge whether public schools should teach “intelligent design,” which holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by some higher power.

The Dover Area School District (search) was believed to be the first in the nation to mandate intelligent design when it voted 6-3 in October in favor of including the concept in the science curriculum.

The ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State have scheduled a news conference Tuesday to discuss the suit, which will be filed in U.S. District Court in Harrisburg, ACLU spokesman Paul Silva said Monday….

Last month, the Dover district issued a statement saying that state academic standards require the teaching of evolution, which holds that Earth is billions of years old and that life forms developed over millions of years.

But the statement also said Charles Darwin’s theory “is still being tested as new evidence is discovered,” and that intelligent design “is an explanation of the origins of life that differs from Darwin’s view.”

Additionally, district officials said they would monitor the lessons “to make sure no one is promoting but also not inhibiting religion.”

The ACLU has said intelligent design is a more secular form of creationism, a Biblical-based view that credits the origin of species to God, and may violate the constitutional amendment that bars establishment of religion.

Let me get this straight: teaching that the universe is so complex that a higher power must have created it as a competing theory constitutes an establishment of religion? I would fall out of my chair laughing, but there’s no doubt the ACLU can shop for a judge who will find this argument credible and compelling.

Has anyone seen the 1960 B&W film version of Inherit the Wind? The cast included such notables as Spencer Tracy, Gene Kelly, Dick York (one of the Darrens on Bewitched), Claude Akins, and Harry Morgan (of Dragnet and M*A*S*H fame). Based on a stage production that fictionalized the famous 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial” in Tennessee, Inherit the Wind and its writers had a very clear and distinct bias in “rewriting history.”

Read the rest of this entry »

In a “linker” sort of mood… couldn’t help but do my part to make sure readers who stumble my way take a look at the following articles also posted on Real Clear Politics:

In his piece, Fund highlights the creation of a new political blog in anticipation of the 2006 Minnesota Senate race between Democrat incumbent Mark Dayton and Republican Rep. Mark Kennedy: Dayton v. Kennedy. Operated by a conservative pre-marital counselor / homeschool father from the Twin Cities, this blog has the potential to follow in the great line of Daschle v. Thune and, of course, Salazar v. Coors. We just wish more success to Mr. Kennedy than Mr. Coors had.

The Post has published a more extensive piece on John Suthers - the governor’s nominee to replace Senator-Elect Salazar as the state’s attorney general.

Interesting notes? The Post labels Suthers “a conservative Republican.” [emphasis mine] I have only heard about him secondhand. I’d love to hear what others’ impressions are of his political leanings. My guess is he’s probably center-right to moderate, which would merit the Post calling him conservative. (A real conservative is usually called something like a “radical” or “flaming right-winger” by the Post.) But I could be wrong. I’d love to hear.

The Post’s writers also build on the assertion reported by Lynn Bartels that Suthers is likely an easy confirmation for Owens:

Sen. Joan Fitz-Gerald, the incoming state Senate president, said people who have worked with Suthers respect his ability and consider him more practical than ideological.

“At first blush, it looks like an appointment that’s going to go through without much controversy,” the Democratic leader said.

In other words, Suthers is not one of those “God, guns and gays” guys who many believe - especially among the state’s new ruling legislative majority - cost Republicans some of their power.

Ken Gordon, the Colorado Senate’s incoming majority leader, called Suthers “a fine nominee” with a good reputation, but said he wants to know more about Suthers’ political philosophy.

He said he hopes Suthers would concentrate on issues of importance to Colorado and “is not somebody like (departing U.S. attorney general) John Ashcroft, who cares about whether gay people can get married and whether there’s the Ten Commandments in every classroom and everyone’s saying the Pledge of Allegiance in the right way.”

Note to radical gay interest groups: I guess we can infer that Senator Gordon doesn’t “care” if homosexuals can marry each other. Or if someone is saying the Pledge correctly. Hmmmm…. Another topic for another post.

Reading the comments of Speaker-elect Andrew Romanoff and Democrat State Party Chair Chris Gates, along with the remarks made by Ken Salazar himself, I think it’s more than fair to assume that Suthers will breeze through the confirmation process.

It’s probably also fair to assume - for good or ill - that Suthers isn’t as “conservative” as the Post labeled him. If he were as “conservative” as all that, he wouldn’t be getting such lofty praise from Democrat leadership.

My hypothesis? The Post is giving hints of going out of its way to make the new Democrat leadership look moderate and reasonable, while the paper itself provides pressure from the left.

Evidence? The writers felt the need to quote this guy:

But the nomination drew criticism from a Denver defense attorney who dealt with Suthers as a county prosecutor, prison director and U.S. attorney.

Suthers is “a John Ashcroft type of a guy,” attorney David Lane said.

He faulted Suthers for zealously prosecuting three nuns who vandalized a Colorado missile silo.

“He’s a politician, so now these nuns are doing ridiculous amounts of time for politics,” Lane said.

What’s that? Does anyone else smell a Diane Carman column coming?

NOTE: By my reckoning, besides Suthers himself, 10 people’s comments were quoted or cited in this article. Gov. Owens and former Colo. Springs mayor Mary Lou Makepeace were the only Republicans. With praise from many and only criticism from the left - not the right, how is the reader supposed to get a true idea of where the new AG stands?

Now that the failed Dairy Queen franchise operator’s days as Colorado Attorney General are coming to a close, the spotlight has been on Gov. Owens to see who will be appointed to replace him.

Attorney General Ken Salazar is soon to become US Senator Ken Salazar. But who will replace him? If Owens has his way, it will be loyal Republican John Suthers, who ran against Salazar for the statewide office in 1998. According to the Rocky’s Lynn Bartels, Suthers likely won’t have problems being confirmed by a closely divided State Senate.

On Suthers’ resume?

What this sets up, as the Rocky points out, is a Republican sweep of elected statewide executive offices:

But that’s okay. We’ll need something to balance the Democrat-heavy General Assembly and Supreme Court.

Ed at Captain’s Quarters has commented on the breaking story about certain of our South Dakota blog friends’ paid relationship with the John Thune campaign. Ed’s reaction?

Am I angry about this? Not especially. Neither site pretended to present an unbiased look at the race — DvT overtly supported John Thune from the start of the blog. (Like Pat, I didn’t read SDP.) Now that the payments have been disclosed, the bloggers have to answer to the marketplace, and I suspect they will suffer a marked loss of readership — which is the only coin of this realm. The free market of ideas works similarly to any other free market; if the supplier can’t be trusted, people find a different supplier.

Ed and the other Northern Alliance guys have been talking up this subject as they guest host for Hugh, discussing a CBS article that has responded by calling for greater regulation of the blogosphere.

Read the rest of this entry »

Are you a public school teacher in Colorado? Do you know a friend or family member who is? Check out the latest from the Independence Institute. The Institute sent out an electronic message to 40,000 teachers last night. We’ve been told KOA’s Mike Rosen will read from it during his morning show. Here’s a nugget from the letter about the Colorado Education Association (CEA) - the state’s largest teachers’ union - and its political contributions.

From January through November 2004, political and small donor committees operated by CEA and CEA-affiliated local associations reported combined spending to political parties and candidates:
- 94% to the Democrat Party and its candidates
- 5.4% to the Republican Party and its candidates
- Less than 1% to other candidates

For a more detailed breakdown of Colorado teachers’ union contributions through their political and small donor committees, check out this detailed chart. Please note… this is based entirely on reports filed with the Colorado Secretary of State and includes only contributions to state and local political campaigns and other activities. Some might have a hunch that there’s a lot more hiding out there… if you know how to dig it up, let me know.

So what’s the big deal? I’m sure 95% of CEA members typically vote Democrat, right? Not likely. But they all have to pay for the political contributions unless they ask for their money back.

If you are a CEA member, the deadline to request a $24 refund is DECEMBER 15. You must request the refund in writing by sending a letter including name, Social Security Number, and Local Association to:
Colorado Education Association
1500 Grant Street
Denver, CO 80203

Your local association may have an additional political deduction.

Please also send teachers to the Institute’s teacher resource page.

State Senate President John Andrews, one of the co-founders of the Independence Institute, tries to explain what went wrong in Colorado for the GOP during the recent election.

Hindsight, as I’ve heard it said, is 50-50. Look - we know the Republican Party took an old-fashioned butt-kicking. Senator Andrews sizes up what the Democrats did right and what he and other Republican leaders could have done better.

Read the rest of this entry »