LIKE 1968, ONLY BETTER

Forty years ago. The Election of Attrition. A political year of blood and mayhem, with the pitiful survivors of November crawling into an arena frequented only months earlier by the stars of their sport. Lyndon Johnson took a powder. So did Robert Kennedy, literally. Nelson Rockefeller was figuratively killed by his party for being too liberal, too Happy.

Democrats were left to front Hubert Humphrey, the happy-faced, fast-talking vice president. Republicans backed Richard Nixon, a paranoid scowler who'd already blown one bid for the White House. Everyone else got George Wallace, a racist still unaware of the bullet and wheelchair in his future.

We flash forward to four decades later and the circle is closed. The best candidates -- at least on the Democratic bench -- are back to flipping impeachment burgers (Dennis Kucinich) and minding the Senate store (Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton). The Republicans overlooked an optimist and a Mormon.

Who would have bet six months ago that John McCain might beat Barack Obama? Bill Clinton:

"[H]e has some redeeming qualities for a Republican: he doesn't believe in toture, he supported campaign finance reform and he doesn't think global warming is a myth ... So it is not gonna be all that easy to beat him."

The Obama faithful sniffed and barked at the Big Dog for not snapping a stiff-armed salute at their Leader, but the Dog knows the truth: This is politics, not the debate club. Want to implement the ideas, the ideals? Win. Or at least act like you want to win, and try to keep your nutty fan club (relatives, close associates, pastors, pill-popping spouses) in the basement until the polls close in the general election.

Obama should be 10, maybe 12 points ahead of McCain at this point, getting ready to vet the cabinet. Bill Clinton was beating Bob Dole like Balboa beats beef slabs in August 1996. Because Clinton knew it's all about the lowest common denominator. Save the oration for the inauguration.

We said last January that McCain was off-his-rocker crazy -- a clinical term, not tossed around lightly -- and thus unqualified to be President of the United States. He's still all that, but turns out he's fox crazy, too, cunning and willing to use the WASP knife in battle. Hence the priggish Sarah Palin, a meaty bone to the GOP base that can't stand McCain (McPain is one of the nicer nicknames the far right uses).

McCain knows he's using his base to win. He knows he's using Palin, even if he believes she's unqualified. He's already on record belittling wanna-bes:

"I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."

Democrats will try to use McCain's words against him, but it won't work. They're too angry at Republican hypocrisy to think straight. They're baffled by the bullshit, belittling Palin at their peril. Wily Willie Brown, the best political animal ever to set foot in California, hailed the Palin pick as a brilliant political move:

"Republicans are now on offense and Democrats are on defense. And we don't do well on defense."

Joe Biden has been defanged by the choice of Palin. That attack dog won't hunt. Obama is spending too much time talking about the Republicans' veep pick, not enough time keeping it simple. And raising money, given his flip-flop on public financing of his campaign. He's got to raise $100 million a month to meet his fundraising goals, and he's falling short. While Obama begs for bucks, McCain campaigns.

Democrats don't get it. John McCain wants to win. They want to whine.

SPEAK IN MANY TONGUES

Sen. Barack Obama said this week that Americans need to make sure their kids know how to speak Spanish. Jingoists reared up and said Obama has it wrong -- Americans need to make sure immigrants know how to speak English.

Pollster Rasmussen has it this way:

A national telephone survey conducted last month by Rasmussen Reports found ... 83% place a higher priority on encouraging immigrants to speak English as their primary language. Just 13% take the opposite view and say it is more important for Americans to learn other languages.

It's not an either/or debate -- it shouldn't be, at least -- but it's startling to see how fury over illegal immigration has created devolution among many formerly high-functioning humans. Their offspring will curse their stubborn bones.

Pissed about immigrants not knowing English? Volunteer in an ESL class. While you're at it, learn Standard Mandarin. It's the skill of the future.

NOT SO LOST, AFTER ALL

A few weeks ago The Media went with a bad-ass story about a previously undiscovered tribe in a rainforest hugging the Brazilian-Peruvian border. Television gobbled the story because it came with good vid, great vid, of tribesmen shooting arrows at the plane during a looksee.

Too good to be true, of course. As the Guardian explains:

[I]t has now emerged that, far from being unknown, the tribe's existence has been noted since 1910 and the mission to photograph them was undertaken in order to prove that 'uncontacted' tribes still existed in an area endangered by the menace of the logging industry.

The disclosures have been made by the man behind the pictures, José Carlos Meirelles, 61, one of the handful of sertanistas – experts on indigenous tribes – working for the Brazilian Indian Protection Agency, Funai, which is dedicated to searching out remote tribes and protecting them. ...

For two days, Meirelles says, he flew a 150km-radius route over the border region with Peru and saw huts that belonged to isolated tribes. But he did not see people. 'When the women hear the plane above, they run into the forest, thinking it's a big bird,' he said. 'This is such a remote area, planes don't fly over it.'

What he was looking for was not only proof of life, but firm evidence that the tribes in this area were flourishing – proof in his view that the policy of no contact and protection was working. On the last day, with only a couple hours of flight time remaining, Meirelles spotted a large community.

'When I saw them painted red, I was satisfied, I was happy,' he said. 'Because painted red means they are ready for war, which to me says they are happy and healthy defending their territory.' ...

Survival International, the organisation that released the pictures along with Funai, conceded yesterday that Funai had known about this nomadic tribe for around two decades. It defended the disturbance of the tribe saying that, since the images had been released, it had forced neighbouring Peru to re-examine its logging policy in the border area where the tribe lives, as a result of the international media attention. Activist and former Funai president Sydney Possuelo agreed that – amid threats to their environment and doubt over the existence of such tribes – it was necessary to publish them.

Use the tribesmen. Just don't let them know they're being used. As far as they know, you're just a big metal bird in the sky.

HUNTER HATER

Fourth-grade kid in Vermont goes to school, talks turkey with classmate during the break known as snack time. Teacher overhears conversation, goes all freaky.

Jared Harrington is now being home-schooled. His parents are on the hunt for a teacher trophy. As the Times Argus report:

Jared Harrington's mother, Wendy Bordwell, and his father, Martin Harrington, removed their son from school with 10 days left in the school year and home-schooled the 10-year-old boy.

"We are aggressively pursuing Jared's right to free speech," Bordwell said. ...

Bordwell said in a telephone interview that she believed her son was "singled out" by Kathleen Backus, Jared's teacher, while talking about hunting with a schoolmate.

Bordwell said that, during snack time, Jared was discussing the recent spring turkey hunting season with a classmate when Backus interrupted the conversation, insisting that there be no talk of "killing" in her classroom. ...

"Jared's teacher covered her ears, trying to block the conversation, and singing 'la la la la.' When asked by another school employee about her odd behavior, the teacher claimed she did not want to hear about the boys and their 'killing.' The boys were left feeling that they were not legitimate hunters, but 'killers' in the eyes of an important authority figure in their lives," Bordwell said.

After Jared's parents decided to take up the matter with the school board, Backus assigned 137 pages of homework for the boy.

"That led us to believe he was being singled out," Bordwell said.

Does Kathleen Backus enjoy her Thanksgiving bird?

DIVINE 69

A little soixante-neuf never hurt anyone, height differences notwithstanding. But slap the number 69 on a T-shirt and all hell breaks loose in Billerica, Mass.

A 14-year-old was suspended from middle school for wearing a shirt that said "SOPHOMORE 69." WCVB reports:

Christina Morrison, an eighth-grader at the Marshall Middle School, was sent to the office Tuesday when she arrived at school wearing the shirt. The assistant principal told Morrison and her stepfather that the shirt was "sexually explicit," and that she was being suspended for the day, the Lowell Sun reported.

The teen said she felt like crying because she only wore the shirt she'd recently purchased from a store called Urban Behavior because she liked it.

The school principal, Roland Boucher, said he wouldn't talk about the specific incident, but added that the school's dress code prohibits "any clothing that displays offensive language or images or suggests inappropriate or illegal behavior is not allowed in school."

The teen's mother, Kimberly Cifelli, wants an apology. Cifelli says she doesn't understand why the school says the shirt is sexually explicit. C'mon, Mom.

WRITER WITH A REAL VOICE

It pays to be bland.

Exhibit A: Steven Barber, former student at the University of Virginia's College at Wise. He turned in a short story for a creative-writing class. His instructor freaked out at the story's violent tone. Barber, 23, was forced into a psych bin, then expelled.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

"It had to be acted on immediately," says Christopher Scalia, the instructor. He alerted administrators, who reacted swiftly, searching Mr. Barber's dorm room and car. Upon discovering three guns, they had him committed to a psychiatric institution for a weekend. Then they expelled him.

Yet the psychiatrists who evaluated Mr. Barber during his hospitalization determined he was no threat to himself or others. Mr. Barber says the guns were for protection from threats such as school shootings. He maintains that his story, titled "Sh---y First Drafts," was merely a fictional attempt to address school shootings such as the April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech massacre, which left 33 dead, including the gunman. The story "was supposed to show how disturbed people are who do that," Mr. Barber says. ...

The problem for Mr. Scalia, the instructor, was the story's references to the class and its assignments and to the murder of a professor called Mr. Christopher, a name identical to his own first name. Mr. Barber, a Navy veteran who served in the Iraq war, wrote of stockpiling alcohol and drugs for a binge and sleeping with the "cold and heavy steel" of a gun under his pillow. "I knew I had a choice," he wrote. "Murder or suicide. Either way, death was imminent."

Scalia is the son of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. He believes Barber's story was about him.

Barber gave the school enough ammo to shoot him. He was already on school probation for booze and for possession a nightstick-like weapon. He also had a 3.9 GPA and was on the dean's list. He says he'd write about "butterflies and rainbows" if he had a second chance at Wise.

The WSJ hed: Schools Struggle With Dark Writings. The real struggle seems to be with common sense.

AND THEY DIDN'T SMELL!

When Bill O'Reilly peeled away a corner of his public mask and allowed us a peek at what's inside -- that's when the end game began. The outcome in our post-Imus world is clear; he can kick and scream (or whine with decreasing volume), but O'Reilly is, professionally speaking, a dead man talking.

As you probably know, O'Reilly talked last week about his dinner with Al Sharpton at Sylvia's, a famous soul-food restaurant in Harlem. During his rambling, O'Reilly repeatedly expressed surprise at the lack of profanity and violence -- and at how well-behaved black people were during dinner and an Anita Baker concert.

Media Matters has the transcript of what O'Reilly said. The transcript also includes Juan Williams in his role as O'Reilly's lapdog.

Some of what O'Reilly said is truth:

I don't think there's a black American who hasn't had a personal insult that they've had to deal with because of the color of their skin. I don't think there's one in the country.

But much of what he said was steeped in an I'll-be-damned amazement -- black folks being respectful! all dressed up! not a grill in sight!

And I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks, primarily black patronship.

O'Reilly is trying hard to dismiss the predictable outcry from his remarks as a sign the "liberal media" is out to get him. Like his notions about black people, O'Reilly dates himself when he peddles the "liberal media" cliche. He sounds so establishment '60s, the parent who's surprised to find his son's hippie friend isn't a grunting Commie.

In saying such things, O'Reilly proves he's a dinosaur waiting for an asteroid. His time is short.

A BIGGER BOMB THAN HIROSHIMA

Rich Little performed Saturday night at the White House Correspondents Association dinner. It was on C-SPAN.

The verdict: lame, according to a roundup from Editor & Publisher. Little did bad impressions of several presidents and told corny jokes about erections and assholes. President Bush guffawed. You may not be surprised.

Rich Little was no Stephen Colbert. That was a given. But even his Richard Nixon impression was terrible, as brightly bad as Little's hair dye. The anti-Colbert route created a time warp, and Rich Little was suddenly back on TV, doing his Johnny Carson impression.

David Letterman videoed a routine in with a top 10 list of Bush flubs. It almost balanced out the Little debacle. But not quite.

FYI

Just so you'll know:

•Bryan Ferry, leader of Roxy Music, is not a Nazi lover. Reuters reports that Jewish leaders in Britain were upset after Ferry told a German newspaper that Nazi iconography was stunning:

"I'm talking about the films of Leni Riefenstahl and the buildings of Albert Speer and the mass marches and the flags -- just fantastic. Really beautiful."

Ferry has now issued a statement saying he apologizes "unreservedly for any offence caused by my comments on Nazi iconography, which were solely made from an art history perspective ... I, like every right-minded individual, find the Nazi regime, and all it stood for, evil and abhorrent."

•Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gets a two-day reprieve from testifying before a Senate committee. He was scheduled to talk on Tuesday, but that's now slipped to Thursday in the wake of the Virginia Tech shooting spree. No matter; Gonzales has already confirmed that he will continue to deceive the public by claiming that he has "nothing to hide" and that "nothing improper" happened in the firings of several U.S. attorneys.

•Chimps are more evolved than humans. Geneticists at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor have compared DNA sequences on genes shared by humans, chimps and rhesus macaques. New Scientist reports that researchers found "233 chimp genes, compared with only 154 human ones, have been changed by selection since chimps and humans split from their common ancestor about 6 million years ago."

•The Pulitzers have been awarded for another year. No local media won. The list of winners includes the staff of the Oregonian, for breaking news; The Wall Street Journal, for public service; and no one from the Washington Post. In other Pulitzer news, Ornette Coleman wins the prize for music, crushing our dreams for another year.

AFTER THE MOB LUST

Don Imus' professional death means we can all move along. Nothing else to see here, save for the squashed remains of an aging announcer who was trampled because he said something crass.

But like any member of a crowd whipped into mass hysteria, we're nursing a post-mob hangover. Destruction can be satisfying, even fun, but once it's over there's always a mess to clean up. Some wow finish.

(For past CHATTER posts on the Imus mess, click here and here.)

Anyone even glancingly familiar with radio knew Imus was notorious for being rude. So why was he fired for acting like he's always acted?

According to The Associated Press:

Imus had a long history of inflammatory remarks. But something struck a raw nerve when he targeted the Rutgers team -- which includes a class valedictorian, a future lawyer and a musical prodigy -- after they lost in the NCAA championship game.

Ah, "something" did him in. Glad to see we've identified the specific problem.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson called the firing "a victory for public decency. No one should use the public airwaves to transmit racial or sexual degradation."

Added the Rev. Al Sharpton: "He says he wants to be forgiven. I hope he continues in that process. But we cannot afford a precedent established that the airways can commercialize and mainstream sexism and racism."

With sweeping statements like these, there can be no shock (or awe) when the call for more heads swings into full cry. As Reuters reports:

Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee said on Friday that if broadcaster Don Imus could lose his job for making racist remarks then other media members should lose their jobs too. ...

Huckabee drew comparisons with other controversial television figures like Rosie O'Donnell of "The View" and Bill Maher of HBO.

"I think if Imus is going to get fired, then there's a number of other people who need to go out the door," Huckabee told Radio Iowa. "Rosie's probably's got to go. Bill Maher has to go. Gosh, half of television and talk radio has to go."

Liberals want the focus now to shift to Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity and other right-wing talkers. Conservative yakkers are already warning that they are the next targets. Limbaugh, long a favorite bullseye for the left, has called Sen. Barack Obama a "halfrican-American," a nonsense phrase he's also assigned to Halle Berry, the actress.

Speaking of Berry, we can't wait for next year, when she stars in "Nappily Ever After," a movie she's also producing.

"Oh, it's a crazy world," the character Ilsa Lund said in another movie from another era. "Anything can happen." Take her advice, and kiss as if it's your last time.

THIS WHOLE IMUS THING

Don Imus, the syndicated radio host, finds himself on the thinnest of ice these days. Last week Imus and his producer, Bernard McGuirk, were riffing on the NCAA women's basketball tournament; the conversation deteriorated into name-calling, with Imus tagging the mostly black Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos" and McGuirk using the slur "jigaboos" to describe the women.

(Never mind that "ho," like "pimp," have been bastardized into meaninglessness. That's a topic for another post.)

Imus apologized last week, and again on Monday, and then he went on a radio show hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton, civil rights leader and occasional presidential candidate. The Sharpton show did not go well for Imus. Newsday reports that Sharpton kept Imus off-balance for much of the interview, and an exchange from the show illustrates the contentiousness:

Sharpton: "It can't just be glossed over, if you walk away from this unscathed, the next guy can."

Imus: "Unscathed! Don't you think I'm humiliated? Don't you think I'm embarrassed? Don't you think I understand?"

Sharpton thinks no such thing, and continues to call for Imus to be fired. So does the Rev. Jesse Jackson; he led a Monday picket outside the Chicago offices of NBC (Imus' morning show is simulcast on MSNBC).

Also joining in the call to oust Imus are the usual suspects. Over at Democratic Underground, this thread typifies the outrage among many liberals. One DUer fumed:

We don't need voices like HIS on the airwaves.

He's offensive, he's horrible, so let's kick him to the curb. It has become the bipartisan, catch-all solution to myriad problems, both real and imagined. Don't like Michael Richards' rant during a comedy routine? Throw him down the well. Don't like the Dixie Chicks criticizing the president? Demand their heads on a wall. It's a short-term balm that does little, if anything, to halt intolerance.

If Imus offends you, don't listen. Same goes for every other radio talker. File a complaint with the FCC, if you feel the need. But demanding Imus' head on a pike? Please. His whole radio schtick is built on outrageous remarks. Anyone who claims to be surprised at Imus' remarks is lying, or has never listened to his show.

Late Monday, NBC announced that it was suspending the simulcast of Imus' show for two weeks, after which time he will undoubtedly mutter something about being chastised and we'll all go on to the next uproar. Political correctness wins again. We all lose.

PREDATOR ALERT

We all know what a predator is supposed to be, yes? We know he's evil and unstoppable, like the monster in that Arnold movie. We know that Life As We Know It is not safe when predators are around, especially when children populate the neighborhood, because predators love to prey on children. "Dateline" tells us so.

And that's the danger. The current culture has bastardized the P-word into banality. What used to be defined as "any organism that exists by preying upon other organisms" now means "any bastard that we can string up, especially if it keeps the children safe."

This week, cops in Florida busted 28 men for soliciting sex with minors. According to The New York Times:

Three of the 28 people who were arrested told authorities they worked for the Walt Disney Company, which owns and operates several theme parks in the Orlando area including Walt Disney World. Among the other arrested suspects were a volunteer for the Orlando Boys and Girls Club and a student at the University of Florida.

It all sounds tidy -- predators arrested, kids kept safe. But consider:

•The "kids" were undercover cops conducting a sting. They claimed to be girls, ages 13 or 14.
•The sting happened because it was "fairly simple" to set up -- not because police had noticed an uptick in sex cases involving children.
•The youngest of the suspects is 17. Another is 19. Two are 21.

There is also the media-whorishness of it all. The sheriff's office invited "reporters and photographers from several news agencies" to witness the sting, according to The Times. Grady Judd, the sheriff of Polk County, Fla., delivered his best fearmongering. "We will not allow these criminals’ behavior to escalate to kidnapping or murder," Grady said in a statement.

Easy arrests that make national news. How can Judd go wrong?

By continuing to hype an "epidemic" that needlessly frightens parents:

The sheriff’s office said that, according to national statistics, 1 in 7 children say that they have received an online solicitation; 1 in 11 has received an aggressive online sexual solicitation; and 1 in 3 has been exposed to unwanted sexual images on line.

Really? Let's dig a little deeper. This Skeptical Inquirer article cites the same statistics and notes:

A “sexual solicitation” is defined as a “request to engage in sexual activities or sexual talk or give personal sexual information that were unwanted or, whether wanted or not, made by an adult.” Using this definition, one teen asking another teen if her or she is a virgin—or got lucky with a recent date—could be considered “sexual solicitation.” Not a single one of the reported solicitations led to any actual sexual contact or assault. Furthermore, almost half of the “sexual solicitations” came not from “predators” or adults but from other teens—in many cases the equivalent of teen flirting. When the study examined the type of Internet “solicitation” parents are most concerned about (e.g., someone who asked to meet the teen somewhere, called the teen on the telephone, or sent gifts), the number drops from “one in five” to just 3 percent.

A three-percent problem with big hype, akin to the overblown methamphetamine "epidemic".

The problem of predator hype isn't confined to Florida. Like most states, Missouri keeps a list of what we'd all like to think of as evil sex predators. According to state statute, the bad guys include anyone who's been convicted of:

The acts of rape, forcible rape, statutory rape in the first degree, statutory rape in the second degree, sexual assault, sodomy, forcible sodomy, statutory sodomy in the first degree, statutory sodomy in the second degree, child molestation in the first degree, child molestation in the second degree, deviate sexual assault, sexual misconduct and sexual abuse, or attempts to commit any of the aforesaid.

In Missouri, second-degree statutory rape means someone who's 21 or older having sex with someone who is "less than 17 years of age." A similar law defines second-degree statutory sodomy as someone 21 or older having "deviate sexual intercourse" with someone who's less than 17.

Just so you'll know, "deviate sexual intercourse" in Missouri is defined as:

[A]ny act involving the genitals of one person and the hand, mouth, tongue, or anus of another person.

Put bluntly, a 21-year-old guy getting a handjob from a girl who's almost 17 is guilty of statutory sodomy in the second degree, and if he's found guilty, he could face up to seven years in prison -- and be on Missouri's sex offenders list for at least 10 years after serving his sentence. He will also have to provide access to his home computer to a parole officer, so everyone can feel safe.

Is this your definition of a predator?

LIKE A NAZI, ONLY WORSE

Mia Farrow and her son, Ronan, have probably decided that she will never work in Hollywood again. Nothing else explains a column this week in the Wall Street Journal (subscribers only, sorry).

In the column, Farrow and her son criticize the 2008 Olympics as a massive hypocrisy, with corporate sponsors ignoring China's terrible record on human rights. Fair enough. But then they compare Steven Spielberg with Leni Riefenstahl, a wickedly talented director and Nazi propagandist:

[D]isappointing is the decision of artists like director Steven Spielberg -- who quietly visited China this month as he prepares to help stage the Olympic ceremonies -- to sanitize Beijing's image.

Is Mr. Spielberg, who in 1994 founded the Shoah Foundation to record the testimony of survivors of the Holocaust, aware that China is bankrolling Darfur's genocide?

Does Mr. Spielberg really want to go down in history as the Leni Riefenstahl of the Beijing Games?"

The Jewish director of "Schindler's List" is just like a Nazi. Um-hmm.

'INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY'

Emily Brooker's 15 minutes of infamy are surely up by now, but the former Missouri State University student refuses to give up the spotlight.

Brooker testified this week at a hearing in Jefferson City for something called the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act, a piece of legislation that bastardizes the meaning of "intellectual" and makes a mockery of "diversity."

Brooker, as you probably remember, sued MSU after claiming her "Christian beliefs" were being trampled (she refused to write a letter to state lawmakers, voicing support for gay marriage). The university quickly settled the claim and cleared Brooker's academic record. The head of the social work graduate program stepped down from that post but continues to teach at MSU.

Republican lawmakers pushing the Brooker Act swallowed a load during the hearing. A News-Leader account of the meeting included this claim from witness Mindy Ellis, an Ozarks social worker:

"(Another professor) made several statements leading several students to believe that a good social worker must engage in a homosexual act at some point."

Where are the "several students," when was the statement made, where's the proof that this is anything more than an outrageous lie?

But that's the way the radical right operates in Missouri and across the nation. Throw out a spectacular claim, rely on the media to report it without skepticism, and then point to the ensuing media frenzy as proof that there's more to the story than smoke. This, by the way, is the only time they like the media -- when it does their bidding. The rest of the time it's the liberal media and you can't trust anything they say.

(The radical right likes to shout a lot about discrimination against Christians, a major point of Brooker's beef. Last we checked, Christians accounted for 85 percent of the U.S. population. That's more than 224 million people, and they much rule the national roost.)

The radical right's other specialty is wordnapping -- stealing perfectly decent words and twisting them into something contrary to truth. Take "intellectual diversity." Under the Brooker Act, it's defined as "the foundation of a learning environment that exposes students to a variety of political, ideological, religious, and other perspectives."

C'mon. Do you really believe they mean it? A "variety" would include perspectives from across a broad spectrum. Brooker and her supporters in the Missouri General Assembly want to squelch perspectives that differ from their point of view. They're pushing for less diversity, not more. That's anything but intellectual.

EMASCULATED IN LEEDS, MAINE

Mike Remillard was a high-school basketball coach, until he decided to act like one. The Associated Press reports:

A high school coach who told his players at halftime to reach into their pants to "check their manhood" before returning to the basketball court was fired.

Mike Remillard was confronted after Leavitt Area High School Principal Patrick Hartnett learned that the coach told his players that the Jan. 23 game against Mount Ararat "was about who had the biggest (male genitalia) in town," Hartnett said in a statement.

"He then required his players to all stand up and put their hands down their pants and check their manhood," Hartnett said. All but one player followed the coach's instructions.

Remillard now says the tactic wasn't appropriate, and "I'm paying the price for it." And that's a shame.

NO WAY, FEDERAL WAY

We thank the gods or whatever for not putting us on the path of the Federal Way school district in Washington State. There, the citizens with juice seem to be a little goofy in the head.

The skinny: A teacher wanted to show "An Inconvenient Truth" to a class. A parent who supports creationism in schools complained, loudly. The school board says the Al Gore film can only be shown only with permission from the principal and superintendent, and only if a "credible, legitimate opposing view" is presented.

It's not a fight over truth; it's a war about politics, religion and political correctness. A story in the Post-Intelligencer illustrates the power of screwed-up thinking:

"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven who also said that he believes the Earth is 14,000 years old. "The information that's being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is. ... The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."

Hardison is apparently the one who does the thinking around the house:

Hardison and his wife, Gayla, said they would prefer that the movie not be shown at all in schools.

"From what I've seen (of the movie) and what my husband has expressed to me, if (the movie) is going to take the approach of 'bad America, bad America,' I don't think it should be shown at all," Gayle Hardison said. "If you're going to come in and just say America is creating the rotten ruin of the world, I don't think the video should be shown."

People with common sense would listen politely to the Hardisons, allow them to remove their child from the class, and go ahead with the movie. But that would be asking too much of the Federal Way school district. Hardison's e-mail to David Larson, a school board member, sparked Larson to call for a moratorium on "An Inconvenient Truth." Larson explains, poorly:

"Somebody could say you're killing free speech, and my retort to them would be we're encouraging free speech," said Larson, a lawyer. "The beauty of our society is we allow debate."

School Board members adopted a three-point policy that says teachers who want to show the movie must ensure that a "credible, legitimate opposing view will be presented," that they must get the OK of the principal and the superintendent, and that any teachers who have shown the film must now present an "opposing view."

Hardison has an opposing view. Is it credible or legitimate? Not unless he has scientific evidence to bolster his own young-Earth claims and to dispute the film's contentions. That's a debate. Otherwise, the district must allow everyone with a crackpot view to make his or her case.

A guy named Curt Brown used to be the general manager of KTTS radio in Springfield. Brown would voice his own editorials; a sly tagline said "opposing views will be considered." The Federal Way school district should have taken a lesson from Brown and stood up against a blowhard.

MATT BLUNT IGNORES CHRISTMAS

We're not offended, but the social conservatives won't be happy with their darling governor.

An earlier post showed that Blunt, the governor of Missouri, sent a memo to department heads, letting them know that even though the unnamed, evil "they" wanted to ban all utterances of Christmas, the governor stood firm in his belief that no one should be punished for saying "Merry Christmas."

Friday, we happen to receive a Christmas card from the governor (clearly a case of the wrong address). The cover photo is the First Couple, with their son standing in a sleigh. No Christmas tree.

The sentiment inside:

Psalm 8:1
O Lord, Our Lord,
How Majestic is Your Name in all the Earth!
Best wishes for a Joyous Holiday Season.
The Blunts
Matt, Melanie and William Branch

A joyous holiday season? Sounds like "they" have gotten to Matt Blunt.

GOV BOLSTERS PHANTOM THREAT

Matt Blunt, governor of Missouri, issued a memo to department heads this week. In it he oozed reassurance, letting state workers know they will not be reprimanded for saying "Merry Christmas."

A copy of the memo turned up at PowerLine. Here 'tis:

From: Governor Matt Blunt
To: Department Directors
Date: December 4, 2006
Re: "Merry Christmas"

Last year there was a great deal of public discussion regarding the Christmas season. Specifically, we heard from those who believe that the Christmas break should be called by a non-religious name such as "Winter Holiday." They also argued that traditional Christmas greetings such as "Merry Christmas" should not be used.

Missouri state government employees should not have to worry about this matter. To ensure that there is no confusion regarding our state policy I am directing that each of you inform all members of your department that they should feel at ease using traditional holiday phrases, including "Merry Christmas" and they should have no fear of official reprisal. I also ask that you inform your staff that the objections of those who are offended by these phrases be given due consideration, but that no state employee will be reprimanded or in any way disciplined for saying "Merry Christmas."

This holiday season should not give state employees reason to feel as though they must check their religious views at the door of a government building. Instead, it is my hope that each state employee enjoys the holiday season with full confidence that their government exists to preserve their liberty rather than constrict it.

Good to know the governor is on top of such a profound, pressing problem.

REJECTING THE HYPE

We're the first to admit that Chris Hansen's "To Catch a Predator" reports on Dateline are compelling television (good TV! good TV!). But do they accurately reflect the size and scope of the predator population in the United States?

No. Check out this Skeptical Inquirer report on the hyping of sexual predators in America. A couple excerpts:

According to a May 3, 2006, ABC News report, "One in five children is now approached by online predators.” This alarming statistic is commonly cited in news stories about prevalence of Internet predators, but the factoid is simply wrong. The “one in five statistic" can be traced back to a 2001 Department of Justice study issued by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children ("The Youth Internet Safety Survey") that asked 1,501 American teens between 10 and 17 about their online experiences. Anyone bothering to actually read the report will find a very different picture. Among the study’s conclusions: "Almost one in five (19 percent) . . . received an unwanted sexual solicitation in the past year.” (A "sexual solicitation" is defined as a "request to engage in sexual activities or sexual talk or give personal sexual information that were unwanted or, whether wanted or not, made by an adult." Using this definition, one teen asking another teen if her or she is a virgin—or got lucky with a recent date—could be considered "sexual solicitation.")

Not a single one of the reported solicitations led to any actual sexual contact or assault. Furthermore, almost half of the “sexual solicitations" came not from "predators" or adults but from other teens—in many cases the equivalent of teen flirting. When the study examined the type of Internet "solicitation" parents are most concerned about (e.g., someone who asked to meet the teen somewhere, called the teen on the telephone, or sent gifts), the number drops from "one in five" to just 3 percent.

The report also tackles exaggerated claims that sex offenders are incurable recidivists:

The high recidivism rate among sex offenders is repeated so often that it is accepted as truth, but in fact recent studies show that the recidivism rates for sex offenses is not unusually high. According to a U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics study ("Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994"), just five percent of sex offenders followed for three years after their release from prison in 1994 were arrested for another sex crime. A study released in 2003 by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that within three years, 3.3 percent of the released child molesters were arrested again for committing another sex crime against a child. Three to five percent is hardly a high repeat offender rate.

In the largest and most comprehensive study ever done of prison recidivism, the Justice Department found that sex offenders were in fact less likely to reoffend than other criminals. The 2003 study of nearly 10,000 men convicted of rape, sexual assault, and child molestation found that sex offenders had a re-arrest rate 25 percent lower than for all other criminals.

We've believed for a long time that the sex-offender list provide false comfort to scared parents. Most child molesters and abusers are known to their victims; the real dangers are within the victims' families, not on a list of strangers.

The odds of being burglarized in your lifetime are much greater than the odds of falling victim to an unknown sex predator. A list of burglars in your neighborhood? That would be useful information.

KRAMER AND O.J.

Michael Richards, the actor who played Kramer on "Seinfeld," went on "The Late Show" on Monday to spew an apology for his weekend explosion at a comedy club in California.

The skinny: Richards was heckled by a couple dudes who happen to be black. Richards freaked and dropped more than a few N-bombs (and the "N" doesn't stand for Newman, either). Someone in the audience shot vid on a cell phone. The rest is sordid pop history.

Painful as it was to watch, Richards' apology -- the act of it, at least -- was mandatory. Had he not apologized he would have been killed, gutted, roasted at 325 degrees and served up in lieu of turkey on Thursday. Andy Kaufman would have risen from the dead and smacked Richards for losing his cool. But now that he has issued his very public mea maxima culpa, Richards is free to continue his post-"Seinfeld" life. Free of the threat of a boycott, the 7th season of "Seinfeld" is cleared for huge sales. The country is safe from white men other than Quentin Tarantino dropping N-bombs, safe from bombing comedians, safer than it has been since Feb. 1, 2004, when the U.S. was attacked by Janet Jackson's right nipple.

But it is a short-lived safety; in the long run we are screwed, destined to choke on our own conniptions. We are being outraged to death. Offended to extinction.

If something offends us today we righteously insist on immediate reparations or the offensive thing must be banished, no thoughts given, no questions asked.

Fox boss Rupert Murdoch on Monday dropped the O.J. Simpson project and apologized profusely to the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Murdoch said the O.J. book and TV special were "ill considered." He took pains to make sure everyone knows he was offended. He did not mention feeling this way until it became clear that his network would probably lose money on the project. No matter; having shown his outrage, Murdoch is now a Good Guy. Our nation is safe from O.J. and ready to repel any future ugliness.

Don't like the idea of a book? Scream until the publisher gives up. Don't like a planned TV special? Yell until the network surrenders. Don't like what a performer says? Complain until the person is forced to capitulate.

If we had followed this catechism in 1975, pop culture would have been saved from "News for the Hard of Hearing" on "Saturday Night Live." Another SNL skit from that year -- "Racist Word Association Interview" -- would have died in the writer's room. That year's great movie, "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," would have been condemned for its insensitive portrayal of Native Americans (not to mention the mentally ill). Judith Guest's novel, Ordinary People, may have been boycotted, instead of praised, for its brutal honesty about teen suicide and emotionally distant mothers.

Change the channel? Ignore the offensive? Don't buy the book?

Your suggestion is outrageous. Don't be offensive.