Conservative Media Give GOP Free Pass on Nutty Pastors

What happened to the liberal media bias? True media liberals Bill Moyers and Frank Rich both bang the drum on what looks like their industry's double standard in dealing with Democrats and Republicans and their associations with various religious figures.

First, Moyers discusses the difference between Rev. Jeremiah Wright's very personable, scholarly talk on Moyers's PBS program two Fridays ago and Wright's fiery public performance at the National Press Club last Monday. He then follows SDModerate and SDPolitics in discussing the strange relative quiet in the media about the repugnant beliefs of leading religious figures on the conservative side:

Behold the double standard: John McCain sought out the endorsement of John Hagee, the war-mongering Catholic-bashing Texas preacher who said the people of New Orleans got what they deserved for their sins. But no one suggests McCain shares Hagee’s delusions, or thinks AIDS is God’s punishment for homosexuality. Pat Robertson called for the assassination of a foreign head of state and asked God to remove Supreme Court justices, yet he remains a force in the Republican religious right. After 9/11 Jerry Falwell said the attack was God’s judgment on America for having been driven out of our schools and the public square, but when McCain goes after the endorsement of the preacher he once condemned as an agent of intolerance, the press gives him a pass.

Jon Stewart recently played a tape from the Nixon White House in which Billy Graham talks in the oval office about how he has friends who are Jewish, but he knows in his heart that they are undermining America. This is crazy; this is wrong - white preachers are given leeway in politics that others aren’t [Bill Moyers, closing commentary, Bill Moyers Journal, 2008.05.02].

Even I have thought Billy Graham is an all-right guy. Hmph -- I guess that means I'm an anti-Semite, too. So are the thousands of people who have attended Billy Graham Crusades since those comments to Nixon became public in 2002. So are the 1500 dignitaries, including three former presidents, who attended the dedication of the Graham Library last year. At least that's the logic folks are using against Obama on Wright: "How could he go to that church and not know what his pastor believes? Either he's a liar or he's incompetent."

Moyers sees racism in the double standard, as does Frank Rich. In Sunday's NY Times, Rich unloads on Rev. Hagee, who reaches 75 million homes with his tainted theology in his twice-daily appearances on Trinity Broadcasting, but whose sermons, as shocking in their own way as anything Wright has said, don't get nearly the media amplification that Wright's have. "A sonorous white preacher spouting venom just doesn’t have the telegenic zing of a theatrical black man," says Rich.

Rich emphasizes that he is not citing McCain's free pass for associations with the radical Hagee and Robertson to make excuses for either Wright or Obama:

None of this is to say that two wacky white preachers make a Wright right. It is entirely fair for any voter to weigh Mr. Obama’s long relationship with his pastor in assessing his fitness for office. It is also fair to weigh Mr. Obama’s judgment in handling this personal and political crisis as it has repeatedly boiled over. But whatever that verdict, it is disingenuous to pretend that there isn’t a double standard operating here. If we’re to judge black candidates on their most controversial associates — and how quickly, sternly and completely they disown them — we must judge white politicians by the same yardstick [Frank Rich, "The All-White Elephant in the Room," New York Times, 2008.05.04].

The "best" excuse I've heard for Hagee's excesses and McCain's easy ride on religious nuts is Dr. Blanchard's contention that Rev. Hagee has shown "political virtue" by knowing "when to back off and disown himself." In other words, Hagee will say one thing to his congregation and another politically correct thing to the media to protect the powerful pols he endorses. Ah yes, virtue indeed.

What's really happening is an exposure of the true bias of the media. Do you really think a media machine run by the plutocracy is going to push the liberal agenda? Look whose pastors that rich-guy media talks about, and maybe that charge of "liberal media bias" will start sounding hollow.

Gonyo Online: Pro-Life, But Anti-Abortion Ban

I learn from an ad in the Montrose Herald that Senate candidate Dr. Charles Gonyo has joined GOP competitors Sam Kephart and Joel Dykstra in getting his views out on the Internet.

Dr. Gonyo's website makes clear his main issue is illegal immigration. He lists some other priorities, but absent from this list is abortion legislation. Gonyo does mention his stance on abortion, but he says legislation on the issue isn't a priority:

I would believe in education and encouragement in lieu of anti-aborition laws at the present time, not because I favor abortion, but because I do not believe anti-abortion laws would improve the child care by American citizens. I will listen to others and keep an open-mind.

Interesting -- at least we have one Republican candidate with a sense of the proper role of government and the constitutinoal rights of women. (Kephart isn't quite there, while Dykstra... well, you know.)

Dr. Gonyo's print ad includes a toll-free number (1-866-339-0390) and an e-mail address (gonyoforsenate [at] yahoo.com), so those of you with questions can finally talk to the candidate directly. You can maybe ask him about his 2007 federal taxes, which he says in his print ad were $82,000 last year.

NV Beacon Beckons Voters to Obama

Northern Valley Beacon's fingers are back in fine blogging fettle, and on this bright Sunday, he brings us a beaming blast for Obama. Noting his familiarity with Illinois politics, Newquist draws the connection between the decent and honorable former Illinois Senator and Presidential candidate Paul Simon and Illinois's current favorite son. Newquist goes on to explain why Obama is the best man for the Presidency this year:

Barack Obama has appealed to those who recognize the cheap, malicious, and partisan-bound discourse that is purveyed by the media and its emulators as them biggest impediment to decent, intelligent government. He is the only candidate who has shown that he wants to lead America into the enlightened state so many of us want to be [David Newquist, "What I Know About Obama," Northern Valley Beacon, 2008.05.04].

Give David's full text a read. After wading some cheap and malicious commenter discourse, it's a pleasure to hear Newquist's voice again urging us toward a better politics.

Feminists Weigh in for Obama

Sometimes you can't win for trying. Senator Hillary Clinton works hard to prove disprove the sexist notion that as a woman, she's not tough enough to be President. She gets on the Armed Services Committee, refers to herself constantly as a "fighter," knocks back shots at the bar with voters... and then feminists criticize her for putting on a macho act.

The Nation executive editor Betsy Reed elaborates on why many feminists, like the 1500 "Feminists for Peace," are backing Senator Barack Obama:

Feminist Obama supporters of all ages and hues, meanwhile, are hoping that he comes out of this bruising primary with his style of politics intact. While he calls it "a new kind of politics," Clinton and Obama are actually very similar in their records and agendas (which is perhaps why this contest has fixated so obsessively on their gender and race). But in his rhetoric and his stance toward the world outside our borders, Obama does appear to offer a way out of the testosterone-addled GOP framework. As he said after losing Pennsylvania, "We can be a party that thinks the only way to look tough on national security is to talk, and act, and vote like George Bush and John McCain. We can use fear as a tactic and the threat of terrorism to scare up votes. Or we can decide that real strength is asking the tough questions before we send our troops to fight."[Betsy Reed, "Race to the Bottom," The Nation, 2008.05.19 print edition, posted online 2008.05.01].

Reed acknowledges that Clinton has faced a constant stream of indefensible sexist rhetoric. But noting how Clinton "has increasingly deployed issues of race and patriotism as a wedge strategy" against Obama, Reed leaves us wondering: Is Hillary Clinton just one of the boys?

Read the full article (warning -- one cuss word included in a Chris Rock quote) for an interesting discussion of sex, politics, and values.

Madison Recount Includes Sample Ballot

And now from the Madville Times Rumor Mill:

Remember last weekend's recount of the Madison City Commission ballots which resulted in Scott Delzer's victory by card game? One of our curious neighbors reports that the recount committee included a sample ballot in the count. You know, one of those yellow ballots with "SAMPLE" stamped across it? Unlike the white ballots that say "OFFICIAL." The sample ballot, which gave Delzer the one vote he needed to tie Monica Campbell, was apparently submitted by someone who voted at City Hall instead of the regular polls at the armory.

Our morning review of South Dakota election law:

1. SDCL 12-16-17 says "If the supply of official ballots has been completely exhausted, the county auditor may make emergency substitution by delivering or authorizing the use of sample ballots or photocopies of the official ballot." I can't find the comparable statute for city elections, but I would assume that the city finance officer would have the authority in a city election to make that emergency substitution if official ballots ran out.
   
2. But could they run out? SDCL 9-13-21 requires the city have on hand "at least ten percent more than the number of voters at the last comparable election." Last city commission election was 2006, turnout 1898. Minimum number of official ballots the city needed to have on hand: 2088. This year's turnout: 1033.
3. SDCL 9-13.27.3 appears to give recount boards carte blanche to decide questions about ballots. They can accept or reject ballots as they see fit by majority vote. One reader pointed out that the recount board is like a jury: their word is final.
   

Even if the recount board could accept a notecard dropped in the ballot box, I'm still curious: how did that sample ballot pass muster?

Meanwhile, Delzer and Dick Ericsson take their oaths at the city commission meeting Monday night, and city government toodles along.

Madison Chamber Director Albrecht Resigns

Madison Chamber of Commerce Director Sascha Albrecht has notified members that she has tendered her resignation, effective June 4. She thanks her constituents for a wonderful experience, but says she has an offer she can't refuse, an opportunity "to travel abroad for an extended period of time." Sounds like an adventure!

But back here at the ranch, Madison will need a new Chamber director. Marketing gurus, now's your chance! Expand Crazy Days! Spearhead the downtown revitalization movement! Heck, if you're good, Dwaine Chapel might even let you see the LAIC housing study so you can help your member businesses plan for Madison's future growth.

The Chamber is taking apps for interim director and will start reviewing those May 9; no word on the timeframe for selecting a new permanent director, but go-getters don't wait! Send your résumé today:

Greater Madison Area Chamber of Commerce
315 South Egan Avenue
Madison, SD 57042
voice: 605-256-2454
fax: 605-256-9606

------------------------
Update 2008.05.06: MDL's Jon Hunter notes in his Monday editorial that Albrecht is leaving for the chance to travel with Action in Africa, a group that raises money for orphanages. A reader heard the trip itself is three weeks. Albrecht's next move after that trip? Hard to say... maybe she'll win a gig as the next young and adventurous present on Globe Trekker!

Do Farmers (and Rest of Us) a Favor: Abolish Property Tax

Unpredictable, arbitrary, unfair... that's South Dakota's property tax system. Nathan Johnson in the Yankton Press & Dakotan reports that the 150% rule and changes in how land is valued have led to a sudden jump in property evaluations in Yankton County. As you would expect, landowners are not happy. And how can they be when our state relies on an antiquated tax system that relies on the arbitrary guess of unelected county employees to determine the value of land?

The state is trying to change the property tax into an income tax, at least for farmers. But this year's HB 1005 is still a crazy plan compared to a simpler and saner straight income tax. Instead of trying to guess how much a farmer might make given a statistical evaluation of statewide soil, climate, and market data, wouldn't it be easier to just tax the farmer on how much he actually did make?

I ran a poll South Dakota's tax system on my KELO blog channel. I asked, "Suppose you were governor and could simplify South Dakota's tax system by replacing every tax on the books with one tax to fund all government functions. Which tax would you pick as the least bad tax?" The results:

Preferred Tax	Votes	Percent
Sales	81	45%
Income	78	43%
Property	12	7%
User Fees	9	5%

I'm no fan of sales tax, but even I can acknowledge it's a fairer, more predictable, more budgetable tax than the dismal property tax. Create an income tax, expand the sales tax, come up with some new creative tax... there's got to be a better tax system than the guesswork-property tax system we have now.

Props to SD Presidential Scholars Kantack and Skorey

Don't break out your anti-intellectualism on these kids: Maria Skorey of Yankton and Benjamin Kantack of Brookings have been named South Dakota's 2008 Presidential Scholars.

These kids are flat smart, and smart is something to praise. Skorey plays flute and piccolo, belongs to both the Yankton HS Environmentalist Club and the Teenage Republicans (discuss that one, anti-eco-hysteria rightwingers), and wants to combine theology and premed studies at Loyola. Putting Ben Stein in his place, Skorey tells the Yankton Press & Dakotan that it's "really important to learn just for the sake of learning, because there's so much out there. ... To learn as much as we can, I think that's really beautiful."

I know Ben Kantack personally -- I've had the pleasure of judging him in several debate rounds, including the final round at Northern NFLs this February, where he won the district championship and qualified for the National Debate Tournament. Kantack's performance in that final round exemplified the best in South Dakota debate; cool, controlled, sincere, and smart, the finest intelligent speaking our education system can produce. Kantack will have a busy June, representing South Dakota at the National Debate Tournament in Las Vegas June 15-20, then flying straight to Washington, DC, to join Skorey for the big Presidential Scholars recognition event June 21-24.

Each Presidential Scholar nominates a teacher to accompany them to the big D.C. events. Which teachers did Skorey and Kantack choose to honor as so important and influential in their achievements to deserve a trip to the nation's capital? Skorey chose Kristi L. O'Connell Ekroth, her English teacher. Kantack chose Judy Kroll, his debate coach.

Good job, kids! You will represent South Dakota well. Have fun in D.C.!

Anti-Intellectualism: The Perverse Elitism

Ben Stein has struck me as an intelligent individual. His commentaries on economics on American Public Media's Marketplace have struck me as generally well reasoned.

But SD Moderate directs our attention toward the kind of loony anti-intellectualism that shows Ben Stein is just another Hollywood actor trading in celebrity and sound bites. (Conservatives like to dish that line out about actors who advocate causes like electric cars and saving whales; it seems fair to apply the same attack to actors preaching the radical right-wing gospel, don't you think?)

National Review Online's blog excerpts an interview on the Trinity Broadcasting Network, in which the erstwhile erudite Stein boils down thousands of years of scientific progress into a single sentence: "Science leads you to killing people."

Right. Tell that to the folks in med school, or the architects designing earthquake-resistant buildings.

Actually, it all makes sense now: Ben Stein's performances in Ferris Bueller's Day Off and The Wonder Years were part of a quiet crusade to make education look fatally boring. Telling us science is about killing people fits right in.

Stein's rant echoes the absurd anti-intellectualism that some of our elected officials engage in to rationalize their failed policies. Kelsey at DakotaWomen points us toward a Daily Show clip that makes fun of the failed federal abstinence-only sex education policy. The segment includes this all too real quote from Rep. John Duncan of Tennessee, who responded to the testimony of health education experts before Congress Wednesday with the following:

It seems rather elitist to me for people who maybe have degrees in this field to feel that they, because they've studied, that somehow they know better than the parents.

"Elitist" must be the new orange for Republicans looking to dress up ignorance as principle. Duncan appears to join Stein in a perverse elitism of their own. They seem to be saying, "We don't know as much as others. We aren't experts. We don't get how the world works. Therefore, we are superior."

I thought the whole point of getting an education was to improve oneself. I thought having a degree was something to be proud of.

But maybe (and here's the Madville Times sweping generalization of the morning) this anti-intellectualism explains the dismal state of funding for education in South Dakota. Maybe our Republican governor and elected officials don't really think science and degrees are that important. If science brings money (high-income workers, federal research grants) to South Dakota, great. But education itself? The general public getting enlightened? Oh no, can't have that. Education is just for snooty elitists who want to kill people.

If we want our kids to excel in school, if we want them to beat the Chinese and Koreans on math and science tests, we need to tell them education matters. Comments like those from Stein and Duncan can only encourage kids to tune out their teachers and revel in their ignorance.

--------------------------------
Update 2008.05.12 09:35 CDT: Read Stanley Crouch's excellent commentary -- "'Elitist' Tag Knocks Education" -- on the value of education and the nonsense of crying "elitism!" at experts.

Obama Wins Clinton Backer on Wright, Gas Tax

Policy and principle: Obama wins! AP reports this morning that Joe Andrew, a former Democratic National Committee chair, is calling on Democrats to unite behind Barack Obama. Why is this a big deal?

1. Bill Clinton apppinted Andrew DNC chair in 1999.
2. Andrew andorsed Hillary Clinton the day she declared her candidacy.
3. Andrew is making his announcement in his hometown of Indianapolis (Indiana primary in 5 days).
4. Obama has won Andrew's respect without pandering:

Andrew said the Obama campaign never asked him to switch his support, but he decided to do so after watching Obama's handling of two issues in recent days. He said Obama took the principled stand in opposing a summer gas tax holiday that both Clinton and McCain supported, even though it would have been easier politically to back it. And he said he was impressed with Obama's handling of the controversy surrounding his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright [Nedra Pickler, "DNC Chairman Under Bill Clinton: Unite Behind Obama," AP via Yahoo News, 2008.05.01].

I want a big South Dakota primary as much as anyone else, but hey, Indiana Dems -- if you'd like to stick a fork in the primary season with a big win for Obama, feel free.

Fight Plutocrats with Plutocrats: Rockefellers Challenge Exxon

It's like mud wrestling without the skimpy outfits: the Rockefeller family is fighting Exxon, the company that grew from Standard Oil, founded by Rockefeller patriarch John D. in 1870. Fifteen Rockefeller descendants are backing four shareholder resolutions, including a resolution to create an independent chairman's position separate from CEO who could make Exxon look beyond short-term shareholder demands for quick profits to long-term sustainability:

But the Rockefeller's said the company was too focused on short-term windfalls. They said the company's reluctance to invest in alternative energy could result in lost profits down the road.

Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, great granddaughter of John D. Rockefeller and a Tufts University economist, called on Exxon to reconnect with the forward-looking vision of her great grandfather.

"Kerosene was the alternative energy of its day," Goodwin said. "Part of John D. Rockefeller's genius was in recognizing early the need and opportunity for a transition to a better, cheaper and cleaner fuel."

The group, which also seeks to establish a task force to study the consequences of global warning on poor economies, called on Exxon to reduce greenhouse gas emission at its own operations and adopt a renewable energy policy [Michael Erman, "Rockefellers Call for Change at Exxon Mobil," Reuters via Yahoo News, 2008.04.30].

The Rockefellers and other shareholders aren't just hugging trees here: they're as interested in financial sustainability as eco-sustainability. Exxon may be making money now, but the company has to look ahead to make sure it has energy to sell in the future.

Exxon poo-poos its wealthy progenitors:

"We're focused on maximizing the return to the shareholder and profitability," said Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers. "Members of the Rockefeller family are well known for their relationship with the company's founder. But we have 2.5 million individual shareholders" [Erman].

<sarcasm>That's Exxon, always looking out for the little guy.</sarcasm>

But the Rockefellers aren't alone: 40% of those 2.5 million shareholders voted last year for a similar resolution to split the CEO and chair. With the Rockefellers lending their support, that sizable minority of forward-looking shareholders may grow and prevail at the May 28 Exxon shareholders' meeting in Dallas.

DSU Promotes Socialism with Tablet PCs

And now for a big swig of the Kool-Aid Sibby drinks...

I've noted previously that the Board of Regents would like to require every South Dakota university campus to follow DSU's lead and require every student to use a Gateway Tablet PC. Two e-mails I receive from DSU's Computing Services remind me why that's such a bad idea.

The e-mails remind students that they must turn in DSU's Tablet PCs for the summer. Yes, the $320 students pay each semester for the privilege of borrowing state property doesn't go very far. For $40, students registered for fall classes can check out the laptop they've been using for the summer. That fee might be worth it, since PCs turned in for the summer will have their hard drives wiped clean and reimaged.

Now if the students have reached the end of the three-year lease period (three-year leases in four-year school programs still make me chuckle), students can buy the laptop for approximately $320. DSU CIO David Zolnowsky says "approximately," because at this point, DSU is still trying to negotiate a buyout price with the finance company, which might just say "no deal" and demand all the computers be returned.

So consider that an avid computer user who keeps her Tablet PC with her all through the three-year lease will spend over $2000 on the lease on a machine that she could buy a comparable version of for $1250 on the open market.

Compare that with my experience. As a graduate student, I'm exempt from the Tablet requirement. I have my trusty HP laptop that cost me $600 or so in September 2006. I could buy a new laptop each year for the same price of renting from DSU, and the equipment is mine to do with as I please. Plus, I don't have to stand in line with 2000+ other students at the end of each semester to check in my machine.

DSU and the Board of Regents would serve South Dakota students much better by letting them buy and maintain their own computers rather than subjecting them to these bloated and unpredictable lease agreements. At SDSU, the eSDSU Laptop Center offers students a choice of Gateway and Apple laptops. SDSU students can get an E-295C fully loaded with a four-year onsite parts and labor warranty for $1,844.

The SDSU wireless network apparently has no problem handling all sorts of different brand computers logging on (just like the DSU network: we grad students have a wide array of brands, and we all use the network just fine). SDSU even offers an unsecured public access network that visitors can use -- obviously, no tech compatibility fears there!

I have my leftist leanings, but the Regents' computer socialism isn't providing the best value for student dollars. Require computers in the classroom if you must, but let students decide which machines they're going to use.

------------------------
Update 2008.05.06 08:27 CDT: We have a deal! DSU and the finance/lease company making a killing on these computers have agreed to sell the used M275 Tablet PCs to students for $200. Students will also pay $12 sales tax.