HometownSource Blogs

In last week’s Upsider, I theorized that anti-war lawmakers in D.C. are treating the Iraq war more as a political issue than a moral one. In other words, their actions to date demonstrate more of a desire to score political points than a principled stand.

Today, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) talked of the negative impact of a positive surge report from General Petraeus, lending credence to that position:

“I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us,” Clyburn said.

I, for one, find it a tad troubling that the House Majority Whip speaks of progress in Iraq not in terms of the benefit to Iraq and the U.S., but in terms of difficulties it creates for Democrats who want an end to the war at any cost.

UPDATE: The last few days have seen rather astounding indications of surge successes. The Brookings Institutes’ Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack penned “A War We Just Might Win,” and then there is this from the NYT’s John Burns:

I think there’s no doubt that those extra 30,000 American troops are making a difference. They’re definitely making a difference in Baghdad. Some of the crucial indicators of the war, metrics as the American command calls them, have moved in a positive direction from the American, and dare I say the Iraqi point of view, fewer car bombs, fewer bombs in general, lower levels of civilian casualties, quite remarkably lower levels of civilian casualties. And add in what they call the Baghdad belts, that’s to say the approaches to Baghdad, particularly in Diyala Province to the northeast, to in the area south of Baghdad in Babil Province, and to the west of Baghdad in Anbar Province, there’s no doubt that al Qaeda has taken something of a beating.

Michael Barone weighs in as well, and, as always, Michael Yon does the journalism not being done anywhere else.

Activists have found a clever way to make sure networks stay “on message” when it comes to global warming; go after advertisers:

Groups like the Sierra Club have targeted Home Depot because they believe it’s inconsistent for the company to promote environmentally friendly products while advertising on a network that has questioned global warming.

Welcome to the new Inquisition; it isn’t what you do, it’s what you say. Home Depot can have as many “environmentally friendly products” as it likes. As long as it is even remotely connected with any questioning of global warming science, it will be ostracized. On the other hand, use as much energy as you like, eat endangered species (as long as they are farmed), profit from mining, or tear up Mother Earth for a larger mansion, and activists will fawn as you predict the end times from global climate warming change.

Al Gore, Laurie David, or any other disciple could use a tire fire to barbecue eagle. As long as they push carbon offsets, the Sierra Club would give them a medal for raising awareness about rare birds and volatile organic compounds.

I’ve been watching some of the recent Twins games on FSN North, and I must say it’s been.. well.. disturbing. No, I’m not talking about the Twins’ up-down play (this week: down). Minnesota’s fate in the American League Central is fairly well sealed; this clearly isn’t 2006. But hey, not to worry, we’ve got a new ballpark on the distant horizon, and enough good young players for optimism going into next year.

The disturbing element is the Twins broadcast team, which has been carrying water for Barry Bonds in a manner most degrading. As Bonds seeks to eclipse Hank Aaron’s home run record, Blyleven, Bremer, LaPanta, and Coomer rarely miss an opportunity to paint Barry and his fancy storebought forearms as a persecuted superstar. They wonder how we, the unappreciative fans of this game, can’t embrace his magnificent career; and why we can’t simply recognize these next few weeks as the historic, record-breaking period of wonder that it must be, a thing that we’ll surely describe to our grandchildren in glowing terms.

Last night was particulary stinky. During the postgame show, Ron Coomer belittled Commissioner Bud Selig, who dared to suggest in a recent announcement that Bonds might have some trouble ahead of him. Never mind that Selig has agreed to attend Giants games during this coming stretch, a clear act of goodwill toward Barry and the sadly drawn-out legal proceedings. No, apparently since old Bud didn’t come right out and bow toward the temple of Balco, he’s just no good for the game, to paraphrase Coomer. Uh, okay.

If it was just Coomer lecturing us on Bond’s greatness, so be it. I could throw that away with his other useless observations. But I expect far more from longtime broadcast veterans Dick Bremer and Bert Blyleven. Together they’ve called games for many years with a combination of wit and talent. When they team up to saddle me with the Barry-as-martyr routine, I just grab the remote and move, scowling, up the dial.

The difference in perspective, I believe, is this. I love baseball, the greatest spectator sport ever invented. And while I greatly admire the on-field talent of baseball players - at every level, from little league through town ball and on to the majors - I tend to view players as participants passing through a game much bigger than any of us.

When a pitcher scuffs a baseball or a baserunner steals a sign, it’s a tactical maneuver, worthy of a wink and a smile. A corked bat is merely borderline offensive in my book, an equipment infraction of somewhat minor proportions. But using steroids to enhance your performance and break long-standing records? Sorry, that’s just lame, an affront to the game’s core, and it deserves no small amount of scorn.

So when I tell my grandkids about Bonds and McGwire, suffice to say the terms will not be glowing, and the summer of 2007 isn’t likely to come up at all. Probably, I’ll shift the infield and bring out Aaron and his classic 715th shot against Al Downing, when I was but a boy. Perspective beats blind admiration, every time.

Sunday we took the family down the hill to our local town ball game, where St. Michael dispatched Dassel-Cokato in the final regular season matchup of the year. The St. Michael club struggled earlier in the summer, but finished with nine straight league wins to gain a tie for the North Star Central crown. They’ll take a break now with a bye in the first round of the 8B playoffs, then try and resume their run of success on August 8 at the tourney in Dassel.

Town ball is low-key compared to MLB of course, and substantially tamer in the stands than the circus-like atmosphere at Midway Stadium in St. Paul. For the record, I profoundly approve of all three alternatives. But here’s the deal. When a guy in amateur ball connects with a key hit, or a shortstop snatches one up to start a double-play, I give the same simple approving nod and clap of hands that I’d send toward Bartlett or Morneau. Same exact thing, because they’re playing the same perfect game.

UPDATE 7/26/07: As The Onion expertly reports, maybe I’m being a little harsh on the Barry. I should live and let live, like Bob Costas, whose knowledge of the game could run circles around Bonds for about a week, without requiring 3 days off after the effort.

Two weeks ago I penned a column about the state’s energy plan, criticizing it for its potential to hamper the economy for an insignificant gain. Today I got a little help from the Washington Post’s Robert Samuelson:

At least 35 states have “climate action plans.” None of this will reduce global greenhouse gas emissions from present levels.

Even if California achieved its 2020 goal (dubious) and the United States followed (more dubious), population and economic growth elsewhere would overwhelm any emission cuts. In 2050, global population is expected to hit 9.4 billion, up about 40 percent from today. At modest growth rates, the world economy will triple by midcentury.

Samuelson also notes some of the negative affects already visible:

In 2006, 20 percent of the U.S. corn crop went for ethanol; the share is rising. Driven by demand for feed and fuel, corn prices have soared. With food costs increasing, inflation has worsened. The program is mostly an income transfer from consumers to producers and ethanol refiners. Americans’ oil use and greenhouse gases haven’t declined.

While Minnesota may be able to reduce emissions without hurting the state economy, there has yet to be a single significant example of such a result.

Wisconsin is taking a giant leap towards socialism, flirting with government run “free” health care. The cost, oh…about $3 billion more than the state currently takes in from most state taxes combined. Nothing says free like more than doubling the need for revenue. But the state does have a mechanism for funding the program:

* Employees and businesses would pay for the plan by sharing the cost of a new 14.5% employment tax on wages. Wisconsin businesses would have to compete with out-of-state businesses and foreign rivals while shouldering a 29.8% combined federal-state payroll tax, nearly double the 15.3% payroll tax paid by non-Wisconsin firms for Social Security and Medicare combined.

*…the health plan includes a tax escalator clause allowing an additional 1.5 percentage point payroll tax to finance higher outlays in the future. This could bring the payroll tax to 16%.

All in all, the state needs to increase taxes on the average worker an astounding $510 a month!

Think of it as a reverse JOBZ program. Between higher taxes and promises of future increases, Wisconsin companies will be falling all over each other to get out. Maybe little old Chisago County has a bright future in industry after all.

All is not well at the Star Tribune, where Par Ridder’s ethical issues have created quite the drama. This week, the Trib’s newsroom employees voted 110 to 2 to call for Ridder’s resignation:

“We, the journalists of the Star Tribune, call on Par Ridder to resign as publisher,” the resolution said. “We believe the unethical actions to which he admitted in court have damaged the Star Tribune’s credibility and integrity and undermined our ability to hold public figures accountable for their actions. For the good of the Star Tribune and the community it serves, we believe he should step down.”

Despite the vote, Avista Capital Partners LP is standing behind it’s beleaguered publisher.

Saint Paul has a super fabulous “separated at birth:” Michael Moore’s threatening letter to CNN, and Robert DeNiro’s character in Cape Fear, Max Cady:

Moore: Think again. I’m about to become your worst nightmare. ‘Cause I ain’t ever going away.

Cady: I’m thinkin’ of settlin’ here in New Essex, Counselor. It’s a small town. Everywhere you turn, we’re gonna run into each other.

Which one is the scarier movie character is a decision I leave to you.

Senator Norm Coleman should be commended for leading the charge against the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which is an as Orwellian example of doublespeak as I can remember. It is inherently unfair, and unAmerican, to force anyone to parrot a point of view.

One might think that, in a country that prides itself for its free speech, there would be wide agreement that the unFairness Doctrine is a horrible idea, and antithetical to the grand experiment itself. Think again:

Senate Democrats on Friday blocked an amendment that would have prevented the return of the Fairness Doctrine, a federal rule requiring broadcasters to air opposing views on issues.

Some of the most frightening statements on this issue come from Senator Dick Durbin, a strong supporter of the Fairness Doctrine:

“The airwaves belong to the American people,” Durbin said. “Those who profit from them do by permission of the people through their government.”

Actually, those who profit from the airwaves are those who provide a product people find worth listening to. Durbin seems to prefer that “profit” be dictated by government, which would regulate that content.

What are Senate Democrats thinking? No fair-minded American will see this as anything other than an assault on free speech driven by frustration that progressive talk radio has been unsuccessful in a free market (except for NPR, which isn’t really an example since it is funded by the taxpayer). Which is, of course, exactly what this is.

The verdict is in on LiveEarth:

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists’ and spectators’ travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations.

Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year.

Indeed. The concert to save the planet has actually set it back in very real terms. But Gaia need not weep, awareness was raised!

Besides, as is usually the case, there is something you and I (the anonymous rank and file) can do to offset the CO2 tonnage required for the rich and famous to get together for fun and profit:

“People leaving their lights on at home when nobody’s there is going to eat up electricity,” he (Jayme Fine) said.

“If we all just remember to shut those off, it’s OK for us to have an event like this.”

Perhaps if we left our lights off when we are at home too, jet-setting superstars could have awareness raising concerts every day.

That plinky little mandolinish tune from the iPhone commercials has been stuck in my head for a couple weeks now. Normally that’d be a bad thing, but this particular slab of marketing manages to rub the right way, mainly because the song itself ages well. Brings to mind the plus-side impact of a Volkswagen commercial from some years back, that brought Nick Drake posthumously out of the darkness for a few moments with Pink Moon.

Anyway, the iPhone “jingle” is from a band called orba square, with their song Perfect Timing.

Helen Thomas goes overboard when she calls the Supreme Court “mean:”

The new Supreme Court is more conservative than it has been in decades. It’s also meaner.

Perhaps Thomas could show where in the Court’s sacred duty it is tasked with being “nice.” The Court’s job is to interpret the Constitution. Period. So what is it that Thomas finds so mean about this court? For one, they overturned so-called anti-segregation law:

Last week, the Supreme Court junked the Brown rule when it struck down the use of race in school admissions in Seattle and Louisville. Officials had used race as a factor in school assignments in order to build diversity.

Some might suggest, and I think rightfully so, that basing education decisions on race is, in fact, racist. I for one, applaud the decision to remove race from the equation. While there can certainly be disagreement as to the role of race in education, one can hardly term the Court’s desire for a color blind education system “mean.” And oh, by the way, it is an educator’s job to educate, not to build diversity.

Example number two:

The Roberts court also upheld an unconditional ban on the procedure that opponents dub “partial birth abortion.” Supporters of abortion rights see this decision as a harbinger of doom for the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling that legalized abortion.

Yes. Tragically mean. Unless you are a half born baby in the third trimester. I’m starting to think Thomas’s definition of “mean” is more than a bit distorted.

Example number three:

The court also ruled that public school principals and teachers can discipline students who display signs or wear T-shirts that carry messages counter to the schools’ anti-drug policies.

Not allowing students to promote illicit drugs in school is mean? Maybe I am starting to lose my mind.

Example four:

And the justices threw out a 1911 ruling that barred manufacturers from setting minimum retail prices on goods.

Imagine the gall of a Court that believes consumers can make up their own mind when things cost too much. Those meanies!

Example five:

…the court rejected a challenge by the “Freedom From Religion Foundation” against a White House program that helps church charities competing with government programs obtain federal grants.

Churches, which do a far better job of helping people than the feds will ever do, should not be allowed to compete for the funds to do just that. Allowing it is…well…mean, I guess.

I don’t even want to imagine what a “nice” Court might look like to Thomas.

While the significance of July 4 is not lost on anyone in America, the significance of July 3 is all but unknown. Power Line has a refresher.

Had the 1st Minnesota regiment not filled a hole in Union lines on July 2, 1863 (and taken the heaviest Union casualties of the civil war in the process), July 3, 1863 may have looked a lot different. Had they not plugged the breach, July 3 may have been the story of the Army of Northern Virginia, under General Robert E. Lee, descending on Washington D.C., where he could have garnered a Union surrender and secured a new nation comprised of the secession states. That story would have rendered General Grant’s July 3 victory at Vicksburg a pyrrhic one.

Independence Day might look a great deal different had the 1st Minnesota not held the line on July 2, allowing for the Union army to hold off Pickett’s Charge on July 3, win the battle of Gettysburg, and because of that victory, the war.

A toast then: Here’s to all the citizens and soldiers who have secured, preserved, and yes, even tested, this great union since it was but an idea. It is they we honor on Independence Day.

Happy 4th!