Mount Virtus

Saturday was a bad day at the bowling alley in Altoona, Pa., for Barack Obama, who rolled an improbably bad 37:

“My economic plan is better than my bowling,” Obama told fellow bowlers Saturday.

“It has to be,” a man called out.

Obama let everyone know he hadn’t bowled since Jimmy Carter was president — and finished with a score of 37….

Somewhere in all that, I think Obama or the reporter got the facts mixed up. I think his economic plan is reminiscent of Jimmy Carter.

I’m not even sure where the bowling fits in exactly. But as one who spent two years of my life in central Pennsylvania - I even attended a minor league Altoona Curve baseball game once - I can tell you that such abject failure at the lanes is not liable to win you respect in that part of the country.

Byron York over at The Corner agrees. And fellow Samsphere attendee Fred Dooley highlights Barack Obama’s attire, which only underscores the lousy 37 to blue-collar Pennsylvanians: “Dude, take off the tie.”

Apparently, it got even worse for the former parishioner of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, as the seemingly friendly media terrain of MSNBC reports that Pennsylvanians are finding his “charm offensive.” Look, there’s no easy way to charm your way out of bowling a 37 in Altoona. I don’t care if your name is Barack Obama.

And to think, 37 used to be my lucky number.

Blogging from Chicago …

In continuing his quest to unravel the mystery of bloggers, liberal Rocky Mountain News columnist Jason Salzman writes:

Most bloggers, like most people who write on paper, aren’t journalists. So their work shouldn’t be held to the same journalistic standards that Denver’s daily newspapers should meet - standards such as basic fairness, accountability, independence and others, as articulated, for example, by the Society of Professional Journalists.

But whether bloggers think they are practicing journalism or not, their blogs should inform people about the information they’re getting.

Who’s behind the blog? What’s the purpose? Does the blogger have a political bias? Is the blogger trying to practice journalism? If so, what are his or her standards?

If the blog is anonymous or allows anonymous postings, it should explain why anonymity is allowed.

Bloggers who provide this information are doing us all a favor because it could help some people evaluate the different types of information they consume. It could help some people understand what journalism is.

I made this argument to Jason Bane, a founder of the left-leaning Colorado Pols blog, and asked why Pols doesn’t have an “About Us” section.

He emailed me that the site used to have such a thing and should probably add one. Similarly, Ben DeGrow of right-leaning Bendegrow.com told me it hadn’t occurred to him to include an explanation of who he is and what he’s doing. After our conversation, DeGrow added this information. [emphasis added]

Yes, it’s true. A couple weeks ago, I introduced the page explaining who I am and what the blog is about. And I thank Mr. Salzman for raising the idea.

But for the sake of clarity, it has long been the policy of this blog to be transparent. Heck, the domain name alone tells you who I am. A quick Google search of my name will introduce you to who I am and what I write about. I frequently allude to many of my affiliations in the course of my writing, but it had never occurred to me to create a separate page until Salzman’s conversation. To continue and enhance the transparency of this website, I decided it could not hurt to add the extra page. So I did.

Mr. Salzman’s concern about the transparency of bloggers is admirable and appropriate. But how many Old Media columnists have separate pages that publicly disclose where they are coming from in the level of detail I have added - if at all? A fair question.

Here’s a story that has been out there for months - a story that has not received the attention it deserves, a story I regret not having taken heed to earlier. It’s a travesty, really, the story of Paul Jacob and the Oklahoma 3:

One of our most cherished rights is to petition our government. If there’s a problem, we want our representatives to know so they can fix it. Imagine, however, if a top law enforcement official denied this right to citizens. Imagine he arrested them, threatening them with fines and imprisonment. Imagine it’s being driven by partisan politics. “Not in my America!”, you say? Let me introduce you to Paul Jacob and the Oklahoma 3.

Charged with a felony for exercising the right to petition the government? You’ve got it. Several months ago, the Wall Street Journal penned an editorial: Read the rest of this entry »

Now I get it. And here I thought it might have something to do with a deep personal compatibility or ongoing spiritual commitment … or even those kind words, flowers and gifts. Now I have a factor outside my control to thank.

When it comes to March Madness, the truth is I never learn. No matter whether I follow the season closely or guess at random, my picks are always mediocre at best. Yet each year I come back to the NCAA Tournament Brackets like a sheep to the slaughter.

This year is no different. I filled out two different brackets on ESPN, made picks on Facebook’s CBS and Sports Illustrated applications, and even decided to accept the McCain Basketball Brackets challenge.

We’re only a couple hours away from the first game tipping off. How long before my brackets implode in failure? It’s just one more piece of the fun and entertainment of March Madness.

Two of Colorado’s hardest-working, most creative bloggers sacrificed their time and their mental well-being to mingle at today’s pathetic anti-war moonbat rally at the Colorado State Capitol.

In addition to some pictures of the predictably naive and downright scary Leftist variety, El Presidente has an edited video of what you’re glad to have missed, including the poet who wants to burn down Lockheed Martin.

Also, you can find a ton more pictures and snide commentary from the Drunkablog’s John Martin - it seems he has developed quite an unfavorable reputation with the Leftist wackos he highlights frequently.

All in all, these two bloggers deserve our thanks, because it’s better to watch the highlights from the comfort of your home than to have wasted any part of a precious Sunday afternoon with the 300 crazies at the Capitol.

If you feel like your life has been devoid of elephant sightings - in particular blue elephant sightings - you might want to drop by and visit my house. In the past week, we’ve had somewhat frequent visits from various “big” and “heavy” pachyderms. Or so my 2-year-old daughter tells us. Sometimes the elephants are “babies,” but lately they’ve all been “blue.”

Hey, if you’ve got half an imagination, it’ll beat most anything you see on The Discovery Channel.

Seriously, though, I’m taking this fascination with elephants as a sign of some innate Republican sensibility. And when I say Republican, I interpret it in the sense of the traditional Reagan conservative coalition. The blue part? Beats me. Any theories out there? Personally, I just think it’s her favorite color.

The Web monkeys at the Independence Institute are busy again. The quality of their work keeps getting better and better. Compliments of Jon Caldara’s blog, here’s a promo that will catch your eye:

Curiosity piqued?

Spent a few minutes surfing the Web, and found this collection of tidbits on New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, the frenzied media’s scandal du jour. From the sublime to the ridiculous … first, Mickey Kaus notes that a Spitzer resignation (unless he’s brazen enough to stick it out) would put school choice supporter Lt. Governor David Paterson at the helm of the Empire State. That’s good news.

And on the lighter side, Scrapple Face’s Scott Ott notes the chief clue that tipped off investigators to Spitzer’s illicit behavior:

A spokesman from the prosecutor’s office said, “Typically, when a Democrat Governor comes to the nation’s capital, he’s got his hat in hand and winds up leaving town with a bunch of money. The fact that Spitzer brought money into the District, gave it to a taxpayer, and left with less cash in his pocket was a red flag for us.”

But the laugh-out-loud punchline of the night comes from David Freddoso at the Corner. After highlighting Republican campaign staffers’ efforts to demand Democrat Congressmen return the money if their fundraising was aided by Spitzer, he writes:

If their PR pain threshold is low enough, then I suppose the candidates will return the money or give it to charity (perhaps to battered women’s shelters or something). But I’d actually admire any one of them who has the courage to keep the money and say:

“Well, at least this $2,300 won’t be spent on a whore!”

Then again, that may not be entirely accurate. It is being spent on candidates for Congress…

Meanwhile, as the media salivates over Spitzer’s salacious story and its impact on Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, a longer-lasting, potentially more damaging political scandal for her rival returned to the news today. Barack Obama’s name came up again in the Tony Rezko trial. Just passing acquaintances, eh? Time will tell.

The master satirist Iowahawk speaks out against negative campaigning in the Democratic presidential primary with zingers like this one:

As participants in the American democratic process, both sides of this increasingly bitter intra-party feud should know better. Just because someone associated with your opponent’s campaign might at this very minute be circulating a story that your candidate is a white supremacist lesbian child molester, does that mean you automatically have to counter it with stories about their candidate running a Chicago sex slave-for-crack ring with R. Kelly and the Syrian mafia? Come on folks, your campaigns are better than that, even if it is clear to everybody that the other guys started it.

A little word for the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to take to heart. And perhaps just a bit ironic that Iowahawk’s post appeared mere hours before the news about Clinton supporter and New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer was tagged with a serious prostitution scandal.

Ouch. A comedy of hyperbolic mud-slinging followed by a tragedy of fallen humanity. And it’s only Monday.

Eminent UCLA law professor and blogger extraordinaire Eugene Volokh exposes a case of political correctness run amok, to the point of absurdity. “Harassment by reading”? Oh, it’s worse than that. University administrators in Indiana came down hard on an employee reading during breaktime a scholarly book that included “Ku Klux Klan” in the title. (You can learn more about the incident, and the book’s clearly anti-Klan theme here.)

Here’s the key excerpt from a university Affirmative Action Office letter, reprinted on Volokh’s site:

Upon review of this matter, we conclude that your conduct constitutes racial harassment in that you demonstrated disdain and insensitivity to your co-workers who repeatedly requested that you refrain from reading the book which has such an inflammatory and offensive topic in their presence. You contend that you weren’t aware of the offensive nature of the topic and were reading the book about the KKK to better understand discrimination. However you used extremely poor judgment by insisting on openly reading the book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your Black co-workers. Furthermore, employing the legal “reasonable person standard,” a majority of adults are aware of and understand how repugnant the KKK is to African Americans, their reactions to the Klan, and the reasonableness of the request that you not read the book in their presence.

During your meeting with Marguerite Watkins, Assistant Affirmative Action Officer you were instructed to stop reading the book in the immediate presence of your coworkers and when reading the book to sit apart from the immediate proximity of these co-workers. Please be advised, any future substantiated conduct of a similar nature could result in serious disciplinary action.

Racial harassment is very serious and can result in serious consequences for all involved. Please be advised that racial harassment and retaliation against any individual for having participated in the investigation of a complaint of this nature is a violation of University policy and will not be tolerated.

I guess if you’re looking to be offended, one way or another you will. A new disclaimer label may be needed for many of our nation’s postsecondary institutions:

Warning: Outbreak of politically correct platitudes and victimhood ideologies on campus. Extended exposure may result in a long-term deficit in common sense and a chronic inability to be taken seriously by people in the real world.

Volokh’s post also highlights the follow-up “clarification” letter from the Affirmative Action office that may leave you scratching your head.

Featured on the United States Masters Swimming website:

Three 90-year-old swimmers — Kay Schimpf (left), with 1,525 yards, Frances Cichanski (center), with 1,700 yards, and Brud Cleaveland (right), with 1,700 yards, of the Florida Mavericks, completed the popular January postal event. They then joined teammates June Reynolds, 86, Cliff Eastwood, 86, and Charles Edwards, 88, to form a men’s, a women’s, and a mixed relay - all in the 85+ age group! Margie Hutinger of the Mavericks reports, “They are a special group of swimmers, as they showed a lot of spunk to do their swims, in spite of the adversities they had to overcome. They are cool role models for Masters swimming.” [emphasis mine]

That’s my great aunt Frankie, my grandpa’s “baby’ sister. There is longevity in the DeGrow genes - my grandpa & most of his siblings reached 90. And the last one remaining with us continues to stay very active in swimming. Though I have only met her in person once, I have to agree that Aunt Frankie is a “cool role model.”

If I should somehow live to be 90, I’d be pleasantly surprised and praising God to be doing the kind of activity she does. But today, since my parents brought this web feature to my attention, I thought it fitting to give Aunt Frankie a little modest blog appreciation.

It’s not often we get to wish one another Happy Leap Day - the only other time for this blog was in the very early days of its existence. So let’s celebrate the opportunity to catch our calendars up to the earth’s solar revolution schedule, and enjoy the irony of what this day means.

One of my favorite February 29 memories comes from my freshman year in college, walking to the buildings on “the Hill” and seeing homemade signs posted urging us to wish fellow student Sam a happy 5th birthday. No, Sam - whom I later got to know and appreciate for his good nature and good humor, not to mention his artistic and literary gifts - wasn’t some sort of amazing prodigy. He was what Wikipedia informs me is called a “leapling.” Another “leapling” is the legendary Al Gansee, who - depending on your reckoning - is either 80 or 20 today.

I’ve often wondered what it would be like to be one of the more than 200,000 Americans who three-fourths of the time have to borrow somebody else’s birthday. Well, today, all ye leaplings, enjoy this day all your own. But does anyone know what else one is supposed to do to commemorate the quadrennial arrival of February 29?

Diverting from our regular blogging fare on this Friday, we pause to remember the 46th anniversary of the decisive and destructive Battle of Cambria. It is also the 12th anniversary of the founding of Cambria Tours (Facebook account required to view page).

The ill-fated, crushing defeat of February 22, 1962, along the frozen pond and quiet streets of a midwestern hamlet, marked the ultimate demise of the small and short-lived Socialist Union of Al Gansee. It’s all chronicled in the biography of the quixotic and eccentric, Michigan-born dictator, Passion and Purpose: The Rise and Fall of Al Gansee. Rumor also has it that the battle’s story is being adapted into a screenplay. We’ll see if it goes anywhere.

Questions linger regarding how much of the story is a figment of the author’s vibrant imagination.

In her latest “Mad Voter” diary, my friend and colleague Jessica Corry launched a witty and skillful rebuke of Michael Huttner’s radical gutter politics, which she cites as demeaning to the women she has invited to join her “Blonde Republican Activists” club:

Indeed, the vast majority of women live in an incredible era of limitless choices. And it is men we should be pitying, especially those like Huttner who dream of building their power base by promoting hostility, self-victimization and rage.

I won’t suggest that Huttner “hates” women. He just believes we’re so stupid and so incapable of thinking for ourselves that we need men to stand up for us. Perhaps he can explain himself at BRAs first organizational meeting.

She ably concludes:

Some lucky activists, like Huttner, have garnered financial support from wealthy political contributors. These individuals gladly make the investment, eager to see their policy agendas positioned as mainstream; with their opposition forced to fight back from being labeled as “extreme.”

It can be a sophisticated and effective political tactic, if done correctly. If based on a difference of ideas, it’s also ethical. If Huttner were identifying differences of opinion on contentious policy issues - like compulsory unionism, socialized health care or small business taxation - he’d be initiating a legitimate debate. In the case here, however, his unfounded attack had nothing to do with ideas.

I won’t dare ask Huttner to apologize. He wouldn’t mean it. Besides, getting caught for his hypocrisy is punishment enough. At least it should be. For those of us who would like to see a kinder, gentler and more honest political arena, we can only hope so.

Read. Make your own judgment. Stand up. Think for yourself. Debate the issues. Don’t get fixated on the phony slime. It will drive Huttner’s ilk of gutter-politics practitioners crazy.