We Expect Your Votes in Return

Will the American Political Science Association Cave to the Gay Lobby?

We broke the story right here, and Inside Higher Ed just recently noticed the situation, reporting:

The American Political Science Association is seeking members’ views on whether to relocate its 2012 annual meeting, currently scheduled to be in New Orleans, because of Louisiana’s ban on gay marriage. Several associations in recent years have relocated meetings due to labor issues at convention hotels, and others avoid certain cities based on their states’ policies. But such changes have been expensive for associations, which typically select meeting sites years in advance, and face fees when they change plans. New Orleans has been a popular site for many academic meetings, and some groups have moved meetings there, post-Katrina, as a gesture of support.

The APSA has twice e-mailed members, asking them to take part in a survey about the issue.

Here is the first of the e-mails, and here is the second.

So what would be wrong with the APSA supporting this gay cause?

Quite simply, it would violate the APSA Constitution, which says:

1. It shall be the purpose of this association to encourage the study of Political Science, including Political Theory, Political Institutions, Politics, Public Law, Public Administration, and International Relations.

2. The Association as such is nonpartisan. It will not support political parties or candidates. It will not commit its members on questions of public policy nor take positions not immediately concerned with its direct purpose as stated above.

But let’s be honest about this. College professors tend to be liberal and leftist yahoos, reflexively supporting any politically correct cause.

Indeed, as the Chronicle of Higher Education (May 30, 2008) pointed out:

This is not the first quarrel over the location of the political-science association’s meetings. During the 1970s, the association abandoned plans to meet in Chicago because the Illinois Legislature had not supported the Equal Rights Amendment.

That incident led to a breach-of-contract lawsuit by Hilton Hotels. In settling the lawsuit, the association agreed to meet only in Hilton properties for 10 consecutive years.

Political scientists, who generally think that the United States Constitution can mean whatever you want it to mean, apparently have no trouble with the notion that the Association’s Constitution can mean what they want it to mean.

The only hope for a New Orleans convention is another kind of political correctness: one based on race. Again, from the Chronicle of Higher Education:

And last month the association’s Committee on the Status of Blacks in the Profession released a statement arguing that “the black and poor communities of the City of New Orleans are still in the process of rebuilding their neighborhoods,” and that “the APSA annual meeting would contribute to the economic recovery of the city.” (The association’s recent conventions have drawn between 6,000 and 7,000 scholars.)

So will it be gay political correctness, or black political correctness?

Our guess is that the gay lobby wins.

And anybody who is paying attention will relearn a lesson they learned in the 70s with the Equal Rights Amendment: given a choice between respecting it’s own Constitution, and signing on to a trendy leftist cause, a group of political scientists will go with the trendy cause.

Marquette: Concealing Information About an At Large Suspect?

From an e-mail to the entire university community sent earlier this evening:

PUBLIC SAFETY ALERT
May 21, 2008

An off-campus robbery within the 900 block of North 17th Street was reported to the Department of Public Safety at approximately 4 p.m. on Wednesday, May 21. During the incident, two male suspects approached the victim, a Marquette student. One suspect displayed a weapon and demanded personal property. The descriptions of the two male suspects were not specific. The victim was not physically injured.

The Department of Public Safety and Milwaukee Police Department officers were contacted and immediately responded to the scene. Victim services were offered to the student involved in this incident.

Anyone having information about this incident is encouraged to contact the Milwaukee Police Department at 414-935-7360 or Marquette’s Department of Public Safety at 414-288-6800.

What is missing here? Any description of the suspects.

And since the suspects are still at large, that’s not a trivial omission.

In fact, an officer with Marquette Public Safety told us that the suspects are black males.

In the past, Marquette has been forthcoming about the race of suspects. Why not this time? One wonders whether Marquette is following in the footsteps of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, which in one famous instance failed to report suspects’ race, apparently out of political correctness.

Of course, it’s possible that the person who sent out the e-mail alert lacked “specific” information, notwithstanding that Public Safety had it.

Developing . . .

Andy Thon’s Replacement Announced

From a University e-mail:

A college administrator who is also a lawyer is the new vice president for student affairs at Marquette University. The appointment of Dr. L. Christopher Miller, vice chancellor for student affairs and administrative services at the University of Illinois at Springfield, is effective July 15.

Miller, a graduate of the University of North Carolina, earned his law degree at Campbell University and his Ph.D. in justice studies from Arizona State University. He has also studied at the Institute for Educational Management in Harvard’s Graduate School of Education.

“In Dr. Miller we have found a creative and energetic leader with broad-based experience in many aspects of student life,” Marquette President Robert A. Wild, S.J., said. “He has a reputation for collaboration and team building in the development of plans and programs to enhance the student experience.”

Miller will succeed Rev. Andrew Thon, S.J., who is stepping down as vice president for student affairs to take a year’s sabbatical. In addition to doing some writing and research during his sabbatical, Father Andy is also serving as president of the Jesuit Association of Student Personnel Administrators.

“The values set forth in Marquette’s mission statement — excellence, faith, leadership and service — are core values I hold personally and professionally,” Miller said. “The university’s focus on the development of the whole student, mind, body and spirit, is particularly important to me.”

At UIS, Miller has direct oversight over 16 departments, many of them areas he will also supervise at Marquette, including the Counseling Center, health services, student development, student discipline, residence life and recreational sports. His UIS responsibilities also include service learning, athletics, admissions, registration and records, financial services, international student affairs, dining/food services, building services and administration.

In his role as vice chancellor, Miller said he had the opportunity to “affect student development opportunities in many more ways, such as promoting diversity, providing more student leadership opportunities, developing our athletics program and cementing more student affairs connections with our academic mission.”

Prior to coming to UIS, Miller served as associate dean of student affairs at South Dakota State University and assistant dean of administration at Arizona State University. He is a member of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, the American College Personnel Association and Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity.

Miller is committed to community service, serving on a number of City of Springfield committees. He has also been active in local chapters of the American Heart Association, the Boys and Girls Club, the Urban League and the Hugh O’Brien Youth Foundation and served as school board president of the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Springfield.

Here is a blurb on Miller on the UIS web site.

Brian Collar has already blogged on this, and his reaction is positive, since this is an outside appointment.

Our first reaction is less favorable, although this would be the case whoever was appointed, since the bureaucrats who might want this position are, as a whole, not an inspiring lot.

Thon certainly failed to provide much in the way of positive leadership when he had the position. Not only was the bureaucracy he headed inclined to shut up student free expression, especially from the College Republicans and Students for Academic Freedom (which was simply denied the right to organize at Marquette), the programming from the Office of Student Development had a rigorous leftist bias.

Looking at Miller’s background, he seems to be just another bureaucrat in the standard mold. Before he joined UIS, he was Associate Dean of Student Affairs at South Dakota State University and before that Assistant Dean of Administration at Arizona State University. The only oddball thing is that he’s a lawyer. That doesn’t sound like a plus.

One possibility is that he will simply be more pragmatic and flexible than Thon, who rigidly supported his subordinates in shutting down free speech from the College Republicans and ran into a public relations buzz saw for doing so.

He may come to surprise us, but the burden is on him to prove that he isn’t just the standard, group think prone and politically correct student affairs bureaucrat who considers a Catholic mission to be a marketing gimmick or (on a select few issues) a justification for leftist political activism.

We will most definitely see.

Derelict

Pam’s House Blend: The Voice of Politically Correct Fascism

Sometimes intolerance comes in such a pure an unadulterated form that it has special interest -- more or less as a Weberian “ideal type” of political correctness.

Thus we have Pam’s House Blend.

The links post is an extended discussion of how views that Pam doesn’t like need to be shut up.

She starts off with the usual list of views that she thinks ought to be suppressed.

If you look on the Internet today, you can find lots of “White Power” racism and Anti-Semitic horror writing and preaching. Christianity backs up the hatred on these websites. Yet no mainstream church admits these jerks in their sanctuaries, prayers, dogma, General Sessions, writings, or websites. No city’s newspaper grants them stories or will accept their ads. They are “shut up” in the USA.

You can even find pro-slavery advocates on the Net, I bet. But they too would not be allowed lectern space on any university campus in the USA.

Of course, any church has the right to ignore or refute any ideas they don’t like. And newspapers get to decide for themselves what opinion pieces they want to print.

So far so good.

But Pam’s point is that certain views should be banned from universities. Further, she doesn’t bother to distinguish between private universities (which can ban ideas they want to ban) and public universities (which are bound by the First Amendment).

But she is just setting the stage for an idea she really hates: the view that homosexuals are not born with a fixed (hard wired) sexual orientation that cannot change.

The American Psychiatric Association and all scientific associations and reputable medical groups in the Western world agree . . . homosexuality is not a sickness, an illness, nor an abnormality. Homosexuality is completely normal.

Some religious leaders label homosexual acts as sinful to their god. Some religious leaders label homosexual orientation as intrinsically evil. So be it. Many religions agree that homosexuality is completely normal and a real blessing.

Science and religion don’t always agree. Surprise, surprise.

The conservative Christian author of a book disputing science “The Born Gay Hoax” sought an invitation from the Republican Club at Smith College. During his speech to the women students, lesbian entered the hall, beat pans, and chanted. The speaker could not continue. He left the hall. The lesbians effectively silenced him.

She goes on to make it clear she approves of that.

Just like we would stifle speech advocating slavery, anti-Semitism, or racism. When Andy Humm, the host of Gay USA on Free Speech TV, found himself on a TV Talk Show opposite a reparative therapy counselor, he refused to speak with the counselor. Instead he spent the entire time speaking with the host of the show. He wanted to know how the host dared invite such an irresponsible person as the reparative therapist to the TV show. Andy went on and on about how the therapist and others like him hurt so very many people ... but he never engaged the therapist ... he ignored him completely.

I think Andy’s tactic was brilliant. I have to admit, I think those bloggers who criticized the Smith women were wrong. The Smith lesbian were right on the money. We do NOT need to invite crazy people to our campuses, churches, or civic centers. The whole western world already knows that homosexuality is completely normal. The jury is back, the verdict is in, the case is over. Case closed. Debate over.

The wingnuts can argue among themselves. They can hold the debate right along side an explanation of the world being only 6,000 years old and the earth being flat. Have at it.

But not at respectable universities, in respectable newspapers, or in the town square. The case is over and the wingnuts lost. If the wingnuts try to speak there, I will be there hitting pans and chanting with the lesbians!! It seems to be the only thing the wingnuts understand.

This sort of thinking is all too common on the politically correct left, including Marquette. As we have discussed, about two years ago, the then president of the Gay/Straight Alliance at Marquette proclaimed that no speaker opposing gay marriage should be allowed on the Marquette campus, since any such speech would constitute “hate speech.”

And the notion that “science has spoken” is echoed by the advocates of anthropogenic global warming -- who are also intent on shutting up debate.

“Science” in modern society has a certain mystique, but the simple fact is that, when science approached political issues, it is typically contaminated by three factors.

• Ideology. Scientists, like other academics, lean to the left and instinctively favor “findings” that help the left. Where homosexuality is concerned, that means promoting the agenda of the gay lobby. Where global warming is concerned, it means loudly insisting on massive government intervention in the economy.
• Careerism. If there is money to be made, articles in prestigious journals to be published or promotions to be gained by pushing a particular point of view, plenty of them will do it.
• Groupthink. Like any other group, scientists tend to live in a rather isolated little world, and tend to believe and accept what “everybody says.”

Historically, the same sort of people who are now telling us about anthropogenic global warming were, 100 years ago, promoting eugenics. In the 70s they were promising a “New Ice Age.” In the early 70s there were promising the collapse of civilization due to the depletion of natural resources (check out the Club of Rome Report). A few years before that, there was The Population Bomb. Disaster, we were told, would come from a rapidly expanding number of people in the world.

The politically correct, of course, ignore science when it’s inconvenient. Economic science says the minimum wage is a bad idea. The lefties could care less.

Of course, if the mass of the evidence really was on one side of these issues, the people on the side of the evidence would welcome the opportunity to debate, since they they could routinely win the debate.

We, for example, love to debate liberals on the issue on the death penalty.

But the politically correct don’t want to debate issues. They want to shut up the other side.

Which tells us that, deep down, they actually have little confidence in the positions they so loudly proclaim.

Mainstream Media Puff Bogus Data on “Street Harassment” of Women

Via The Word Warrior, a Marquette feminist blog that deserves credit for good reporting on this issue.

It started with the following story reported by CNN.

(LifeWire) -- When Holly Kearl was researching her master’s thesis on street harassment last winter, she was pleasantly surprised that lewd remarks were few and far between. Then spring rolled around.

“Suddenly, it was April, and I was getting yelled at everywhere by men in cars,” said Kearl, who has since completed a degree in women’s studies and public policy from George Washington University.

As part of her research, Kearl conducted an anonymous, informal e-mail survey of 225 women on the subject. She found that 98 percent of respondents experienced some form of street harassment at least a few times, and about 30 percent reported being harassed on a regular basis.

“For me, anyone who interrupts my personal space to objectify me or make me feel uncomfortable or threatened is harassing me,” she says.

The CNN article admits that some women like the attention, which in the more moderate forms simply says “hey, you’re attractive.”

But then it resumes the feminist blather.

But Kimberly Fairchild, 29, an assistant professor of psychology at Manhattan College in New York, says catcalling can take a larger emotional toll than many women realize.

“There seems to be some evidence that it increases self-objectification,” said Fairchild, who surveyed 550 women both online and at Rutgers University in 2006 and 2007. The women -- who ranged in age from 15 to 64 in the international online component and from 18 to 24 in the Rutgers survey of women from central New Jersey -- were asked about their experiences with street harassment.

Catcalling “encourages women to look at themselves as body parts instead of as full, whole, intelligent human beings” and can cause women to fear for their safety, Fairchild says.

“When a man catcalls you, you don’t know if it will end at that point or if it could escalate to assault,” she added.

The problem, which the CNN story failed to mention, is that the sample of women that produced the “98 percent” figure was absurdly skewed.

The author, Holly Kearl, left a comment on The Word Warrior explaining the problem.

“My survey wasn’t meant to be representative of the larger population. I specifically targeted people I thought would be feminists and thereby might know about anti-street harassment websites like the HollaBacks. That was more what my thesis focused on - how were people responding to and combating street harassment, and did they use these websites? I sent the survey to women’s studies listservs and other feminist groups, so I knew the data was skewed and stated that in my thesis when I talked about the data from my survey. The survey was just one component of how I gathered data. Most of my data came from reading 706 postings on 6 anti-street harassment websites which offered me voluntarily given, first-hand accounts of how people had been harassed, how they reacted, and how they used the websites. In the survey, asking people if they had been harassed was a side question to the ones I was more interested in - how did people respond and what did they think of the hollaback websites . . . and the information about how many people had been harassed warranted two sentences in my 129 page thesis…”

“It’s been hard having the large scope of my thesis reduced to a few sentences put in a context not of my choosing with a headline and photo I would never have chosen either.”

The photo most certainly was a bit salacious.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

But the fundamental, indeed fatal, problem is that Kearl sought a sample of feminists, who would be expected to see this issue through the feminist lens of victimization and aggrievement.

Further, there was a massive amount of self-selection into her sample, since it was heavily drawn from women who frequented feminist websites dealing with the issue.

Implying that her sample in any way generalizes to all women was absurd.

There is no doubt that feminists (like all academics who are essentially activists, and not dispassionate scholars) have trafficked in bogus statistics -- most notably on the incidence of date rape.

But in this case, at least, Kearl and The Word Warrior deserve some credit for trying to keep the record straight.

Obama as Curious George: Chickens Coming Home To Roost

It’s absurdly offensive, of course: the t-shirt with a picture of Barack Obama in the guise of “Curious George,” the little monkey in a classic series of children’s books.

Patrick McIlheran, however, points out why people on the left have no moral standing to criticize it.

Anyhow, if he were displaying such transgressiveness in an art-school exhibit and his political polarity were reversed, you’d have the beautiful people flocking to his defense.

And then there is this:

Then again, this would be more obvious if we weren’t just wrapping up eight years in which comparisons of national leaders to chimpanzees were just ordinary political dialog from many of the same people all enthused over Obama. What goes around...

Click through to the linked pages to see what he’s talking about.

It Worked For Dorothy!

Gay Fascism on Campus: Livid Lesbians Shut Up Speaker They Dislike

From World Net Daily:

Rioting lesbians have stormed a speech by “Born Gay Hoax” author Ryan Sorba on the campus of Smith College in Massachusetts, shutting down his address, according to two major pro-family organizations, Americans for Truth and Mass Resistance.

“Beware lesbians with frying pans (if you care about free speech),” AFT said in his announcement. “Lesbian activists at Smith College just couldn’t stand by and let a young critic explain his views about the supposed innateness of homosexuality – so they stormed Ryan Sorba’s speech on the ‘Born Gay Hoax’ and forced him to end it prematurely.”

“Thus they decided for everyone in the room – supporters, foes, the curious and the undecided – whether Sorba’s arguments would be heard. Stalin would be proud,” said AFT’s Peter LaBarbera.

Shouts of “We’re here, we’re queer, Get used to it!” combined with various shrieks and screams punctuate the protests.

With police officers standing idly by, a homosexual protest leader takes the microphone and orders, “They have told us to leave, so everyone needs to stay.”

While security officers are shown doing nothing to eject the mob, Sorba is told to leave the room.

You can watch videos of what happened here.

If the actions of these bigoted leftists are not appalling enough, even worse are the people who support them.

Consider, for example, a blog called “Pam’s House Blend,” which is populated by this sort of people.

The title of her post is “Smith College students give ‘Born Gay Hoax’ author a piece of their minds” -- an absurd euphemism.

Pam, in an update, backs away a bit from endorsing the Nazi behavior the the Smith lesbians, but her commenter have no such compunctions. One said, for example:

Personally I don’t see a problem with the protest. In fact, I think we need more of such actions these days, as long as they are not physically violent. I’m as big a fan of free speech protection as the next person. But what would the rightful reaction on campus have been if the speaker were someone plugging a book saying the Holocaust never really happened? Or one promoting the KKK? I don’t see a problem disrupting hate speech which is ultimately responsible for horrific events like the murder of Lawrence King.

Of course, this person would never object to a speaker saying that the U.S. government invented AIDs to kill black people, or that Dick Cheney planned and executed the 9/11 attacks. Apparently she is OK with free speech if the speaker doesn’t say anything “really bad.”

And she and her friends get to decide what is “really bad.”

Another poster:

I do not like being measured as wanting by a conservative Republican college student who gets to preach bad science, a single biblical interpretive viewpoint and who arrogantly expects not to be challenged on trying to cut the basis of our citizenship out from under us.

This is very standard thinking on the part of the politically correct crowd on campus. What they “do not like” must be banned. What they consider “bad science” must be banned. A “single biblical interpretive viewpoint” (unless it is their own) must be banned.

Another, even more chilling comment comes from a poster who is proud to have shut up a speaker.

When I was an undergrad at New Mexico Tech in the late 80’s we had a “Faith Healer” (forget who, but Benny Hinn comes to mind) who wanted to hold his revival on campus in our auditorium. NMT is strictly science oriented and the vast majority of students and professors joined together to protest the upcoming event as being contrary to our educational agenda of fact-based instruction.

As a result, the on-campus event was cancelled and moved to an off-campus location. HOWEVER, we continued the protest and got the Townies involved as well. Socorro has two primary populations: 1) The College, students & professors, fairly liberal; and 2) The Townies, Hispanic, very Catholic, conservative. Needless to say, it wasn’t hard to get the everyone worked up against a non-Catholic and he ended up just cancelling his appearance in town all together.

It was totally peaceful, we did not silence him or prevent him from coming to town, but we did drown him out and let him know that we were not going to stand by quietly to let him spread his fraudulent propaganda on our campus or in our town.

New Mexico Tech is a state university, and speakers have the full rights of the U.S. Constitution (unlike Marquette, which has the legal right to shut up faith healers, or pro-abortion speakers, if it wants). So demanding that the college cancel the speech was a direct attack on the Constitution.

Notice how the woman in question is bragging about the fact that she and her leftist friends could exploit anti-Protestant religious bias.

One has every right to say faith healing is nonsense, but it’s hardly hate speech. It’s just something that secular liberals don’t believe in.

(It would be interesting if Marquette banned a faith healer, since the Catholic Church has a rite of exorcism. But then, Marquette might insist that Protestants can’t be faith healers.)

There is, of course, plenty of this sort of intolerance in Wisconsin.

A local liberal blogger (“Wallah”) found it “encouraging” that students at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee tried to disrupt a speech by David Horowitz.

And students at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point vandalized an anti-abortion display on that campus.

This folks, is the campus left in 2008, with a festering hatred for ideas they disagree with, and a fascist willingness to shut up those ideas.

Obama’s New Pastor

Newsmax.com, where we found this link, finds this sermon clip “inflammatory.”

We’ll let viewers judge.

New Trinity Church minister Otis Moss has been defending his predecessor, Jeremiah Wright, but of course he pretty much has to. It remains to be seen whether he will be in the Wright tradition or not.

Anti-Abortion Display Vandalized at University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point

From a news release from Wisconsin Right to Life:

Pointers for Life is a right-to-life group at UW-Stevens Point whose leader is funded by Wisconsin Right to Life.

It what they deemed a moving visual demonstration of abortion in America, Pointers set up a Cemetery of Innocents display on campus consisting of 4,000 crosses to depict the number of human lives lost each day to abortion.

Overnight, the display was vandalized with crosses slashed and broken. As several Pointers’ members were repairing the display, a group of displeased students, led by student Senator Roderick King, began to yell at them and debate with them. They demanded to know who authorized the cross project.

Not satisfied with answers, King and his friends began pulling hundreds of crosses from the ground and tossing them away. Pointers then called Protective Services, knowing their project had been properly approved.

King claimed that Pointers for Life had “no right” to display the crosses and that it was “his duty as a paying student” to take it down. “The freedom of speech does not cover these signs and symbols,” he claimed. When Protective Services stepped in, King’s friends stopped but King continued until he was informed that unless he ceased, he would have to pay for the damages.

The Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs eventually restored order. Pointers for Life submitted a complaint to the student association, asking that King resign or be disciplined.

“We wonder what caused such intolerance and disrespect,” said Barbara Lyons, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. “It is hard to understand why a group of white crosses would trigger such an extreme response from King.”

Checking he Wausau Daily Herald, we find that the news release is correct and accurate.

Indeed, there is a video on YouTube (see below).

As always, the fascists on a contemporary college campus are on the left.



[Update]

From the Huffington Post, apparently the UW-Stevens Point has punished the leftist vandal, although they invoke privacy laws and won’t reveal what the punishment is.

LBJ Used the FBI For Political Purposes -- Bill Moyers Implicated

From the Wall Street Journal, an article by Laurence H. Silberman, a former Justice Department official who was in charge of investigating abuses by the FBI.

Only a few weeks before the 1964 election, a powerful presidential assistant, Walter Jenkins, was arrested in a men’s room in Washington. Evidently, the president was concerned that Barry Goldwater would use that against him in the election. Another assistant, Bill Moyers, was tasked to direct Hoover to do an investigation of Goldwater’s staff to find similar evidence of homosexual activity. Mr. Moyers’ memo to the FBI was in one of the files.

When the press reported this, I received a call in my office from Mr. Moyers. Several of my assistants were with me. He was outraged; he claimed that this was another example of the Bureau salting its files with phony CIA memos. I was taken aback. I offered to conduct an investigation, which if his contention was correct, would lead me to publicly exonerate him. There was a pause on the line and then he said, “I was very young. How will I explain this to my children?” And then he rang off. I thought to myself that a number of the Watergate figures, some of whom the department was prosecuting, were very young, too.

Other presidents, according to those files, misused the bureau, although never Truman and Eisenhower. But Johnson clearly was the most demanding. This discovery was particularly painful for me. Although I was a life-long Republican, I had not only voted for LBJ, I had signed an ad supporting him, which got me ejected from the Hawaii Young Republicans.

In 1968 the FBI, at the president’s direction, actually surveilled Spiro Agnew, the Republican vice-presidential candidate. To be sure, as subsequent events revealed, Agnew might well have been under surveillance when, as governor of Maryland, he was taking bribes; but in 1968 it was for the purpose of determining whether he was in contact with South Vietnamese leaders. It was not for law-enforcement purposes. Incidentally, the FBI never determined that he was in contact with the South Vietnamese.

WKLH and Bill Maher

This afternoon, the management of WKLH considered the issue of anti-Christian bigot Bill Maher, whom the station has been sponsoring in Milwaukee.

We just talked to Station Manager Tom Joerres.

The verdict? Sort of a non-verdict, actually. Joerres stated that all of the station’s contractual obligations to Maher’s promoters have been satisified, and the issue is now moot. There is nothing “left to be done,” he said. He said it was “a moot point” and “behind us.”

He expressed surprise that the issue broke this week, rather than last week. We explained that some things slip under the radar until somebody notices them. In this case, the “somebodies” were Sly Sylvester in Madison, and the Marquette Warrior in Milwaukee.

We asked him whether the station is still giving away Maher tickets, and he said he believed those tickets are all gone.

We asked him whether the promo blurb for Maher is still on the station website, and he wasn’t entirely sure.

In reality, the blurb on the event is now gone from both the WKLH “Concerts” page, and the “Events” page.

Joerres said that, had the station known about the hateful comments of Maher, those comments “would have given us pause,” and “we would have looked at it differently.” Some of Maher’s most incendiary comments, attacking the Pope as someone who “used to be a Nazi” and the Catholic Church as a “child abusing religious cult” happened after WKLH signed on to the sponsorship.

Joerres added that WKLH is not “an AM station that seeks controversy.”

Good point. Anybody has a right to bring into Milwaukee any speaker they want. But any business firm that tries to be “mainstream” and appeal to a wide audience would be well advised to avoid supporting or endorsing people like Maher.

Of course, if the speaker engaged in vitrolic attacks on blacks or homosexuals, the local leftists would immediately see this point.

But where Christians are attacked, they see it differently.

Sponsoring an Anti-Christian Bigot: WKLH Responds

An e-mail from WKLH:

Hi John,

Thank you for contacting us regarding the Bill Maher show. I’ll call you shortly, but first a little background about our promotional involvement.

Our agreement with Pabst/Riverside was a term agreement whereby we partnered to promote several shows within a calendar window.

We are involved in actual artist booking & recommendation ONLY for those shows that benefit station-specific events or charities such as our Christmas for Kids benefit or Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin fundraisers.

At the time of the arrangement Mr. Maher had not made his insensitive remarks, although we will not hide behind that circumstance as an excuse.

The vast majority of shows we have promoted have been well received and non-controversial, including the many that have supported our Dave & Carole Miracle Marathon for Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin and Christmas for Kids.

Mr. Maher’s comments have obviously offended many people. While we usually let the market dictate the success or failure of a given show, we will reconsider our promotional involvement with this show.

Thank you for sharing your comments.

Bob Bellini
Program Director
96.5 WKLH Milwaukee

We talked to Bellini after receiving this e-mail, and the people who run WKLH will be meeting later today to decide what to do about this situation.

Bellini made it clear that he is no fan of Maher.

WKLH could simply “pull its sponsorship” of Maher, although Bellini pointed out that “the horse is out of the barn” in some ways. Promotional materials already printed can’t be unprinted.

But he conceded that WKLH could, if it wanted, stop giving away tickets to the Maher performance and take the promotional blurb off its website.

Such actions, while not large in the entire scope of things, would at least send the symbolic message that WKLH does not condone or support Maher’s anti-Christian bigotry.

A call to 414-978-9000, or an e-mail to Tjoerres@mkeradiogrp.com (station manager Tom Joerres) with a civil statement about how the station should distance itself from this kind of bigotry would be in order.

We can’t imagine WKLH promoting or supporting a comedian who was famous for attacking blacks or gays. Attacking Christians should be equally embarrassing to WKLH.

American Pulling Sponsorship From Bill Maher Performance

We just talked to Wyn Becker, top Public Relations guy at American TV, and he informs us that American TV will be pulling its sponsorship of the controversial Bill Maher concert in Milwaukee.

Maher, who quite openly hates Christians, was sponsored by American TV, WKLH Radio, and the Shepherd Express in what appears to have been a package deal to sponsor acts at certain venues -- the Riverside and Pabst theaters in Milwaukee in this case.

The American logo will not be seen on ads for the comedian, on the web page promoting his performance or any signage connected to the concert.

Becker mentioned that American has been bombarded with calls on this issue today.

Becker admitted that he had seen the list of comedians slated to perform. “I was aware . . . they sent it to me ahead of time” he told us. And further, “they sent the list over.” Becker further said “Did it slip by me? I looked it over and it seemed ok.” It appeared that Becker recognized Maher as a well-known name, but it didn’t “click” that he had made a long series of bigoted comments about Christians.

Becker stressed that, in the entire scope of American TV public relations, the comedians series at the Riverside and Pabst theaters “isn’t necessarily a huge project.” So it’s not as though anybody at American’s corporate headquarters in Madison sat down and hashed over the list of performers.

Becker made it clear that the Maher performance is part of a package of comedy shows -- perhaps 15 per year -- that American most certainly does want to support. “We sponsor the Pabst and the Riverside,” he said, describing them as “historic old venues.”

Indeed, both venues have been revitalized in recent years, and Becker seemed proud of that fact and of the comedy series that has featured acts such as “Second City.” In any given year, American may not know all the acts that will be booked when it promises support before the season starts.

Although everybody -- including American and the management of the Riverside/Pabst operation -- ought to be more careful about involving sponsoring corporations in promotions that will prove embarrassing, no deliberate decision to do something known to offend Christians was made.

It appears that American has done everything it can, at this point, to distance itself from this inflammatory and intolerant comedian.

[Update]

Charlie Sykes has an update on this, with an e-mail from Wyn Becker that we had not seen before, saying essentially the same thing he said in his interview with us.

Obama’s Buddy Ayers: The Picture Tells It All

Via Badger Blogger, Barack Obama’s friend Bill Ayers in a pose that shows just what he thinks of America.

Ayers is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, in Education, which tells you a lot about education schools these days.

His connections with Obama aren’t trivial.

But as Patrick at Badger Blogger put it, “Don’t Question Their Patriotism.”

[Update]

Best comment on this, from Fraley’s Daily Takes: “Now we know why Obama doesn’t wear a flag on his lapel. He’s afraid Bill Ayers will stand on his chest.”

Sponsoring an Anti-Christian Bigot: American TV Responds

A message from American TV about their sponsorship of “comedian” Bill Maher in Milwaukee:

John-

We regret if our advertising co-sponsorship participation for the upcoming Bill Maher concert has offended you or your “readers.” However, I would like to explain our involvement. We did not directly and individually select Mr. Maher’s concert to sponsor and have no direct connection with the production or promotion of this show. American does have partnerships with WKLH Radio with a number of events they co-sponsor at certain venues around Milwaukee including many comedy shows at the Riverside/Pabst Theaters.

As an example, we are also tied to the Dave & Carole Comedypalooza which is a benefit for Milwaukee’s Children Hospital. Bill Maher’s appearance is part of a yearlong series of comedy concerts which we co-sponsor with The Riverside and WKLH.

You are correct, Mr. Maher is a very opinionated political/social humorist and we may not agree with or necessarily condone the content of his material. Nor would we want to defend his style of humor, since the direction his topics take in his act are very subjective. Our intent was to advertise with a well respected concert venue and radio station which bring in many popular comedy performances throughout the year. This is somewhat similar to us having our television commercials run on a popular show during the year and then have that show deal with a rather controversial topic in a given week, a topic that many people might take offense too.

Mr. McAdams, I know this may not change the way you feel and I respect your opinion, but I felt that we owed you a further explanation since you took the time to voice your concerns. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to let me know.

Respectfully,

Stephen DeShong
Corporate Consumer Relations

Leftie Blogger Applauds Disruption of Speech at UWM

Liberals used to at least pretend that they believed in free speech. But they seldom bother any more.

Example: “Whallah!,” a blog started for the sole purpose of stalking Jessica McBride, deals with a blog post from Patrick McIlheran about how a speech from David Horowitz at UWM was disrupted by leftist and Islamic students. According to McIlheran:

The encouraging part is this, and you’ll see it about two-thirds of the way through: “University officials ordered metal detectors and a security force of a more than dozen burly officers and staffers for the event. I didn’t count how many individuals had to be ejected during my remarks but there were many,” he writes.

McIlheran finds this encouraging because UWM protected Horowitz’ right to speak. Some might consider it deplorable that people who disagree with Horowitz tried to shut him up.

But not Whallah. He opines:

Why is that encouraging, you may ask? Because it shows there is a growing number of people that see through the lies of the righties. It also shows that there is growing discontent with the way that things are going in this country, and that more and more people are ready to correct the course we are on.

That’s right.

He finds it “encouraging” that people tried to shout down and disrupt the talk of a speaker with whom he disagrees.

Slippery SOB

Anti-Christian Bigot in Milwaukee: More

Just a few hours ago, we blogged on the fact that Bill Maher will be coming to Milwaukee on July 24th at the Riverside Theater.

So what’s wrong with that?

In the first place he’s an anti-Christian and generally anti-religious bigot.

But he has First Amendment rights just like everybody else. (Those rights, we note, are not abridged if people demonstrate against him.)

The kicker is: American TV, the local furniture and electronics store is sponsoring him!

They want to sell stuff to Christians -- who after all are the overwhelming majority of the population in Wisconsin. So why are they supporting him?

From Badger Blogger, a suggestion:

Here’s my recommendation for anyone reading this who is truly offended that American would sponsor Maher:

On Monday, call the American TV corporate offices at (608) 271-1000 and ask to speak with company President Doug Ruehl. (Sounds like: “Rule”)

You will be directed to Doug Ruehl’s public relations assistant, who will explain to you that Mr. Ruehl does not accept direct phone calls, but they will offer to arrange a return call to you from Mr. Ruehl.

Explain to him that you are a previous customer, and that you are calling to express your displeasure over American TV’s sponsorship of the Maher appearance, and that you fear that this will prevent you from doing business with American TV and Appliance stores in the future.

A poster at Badger Blogger also pointed out that WKLH Radio is also co-sponsoring Maher. In fact, the performance is advertised on the WKLH website.

They too appear not to mind insulting Christians -- and Muslims too.

The third sponsor is the Shepherd Express. Their core readership is about where Maher is, so it’s no surprise.

Anti-Christian Bigot, Bill Maher, Sponsored in Milwaukee by American TV

One does learn interesting things by reading the Shepherd Express. The interesting thing, when I picked up a copy today, was that American TV is sponsoring the appearance of Bill Maher in Milwaukee.

Maher is famous for, among other things, his hatred of Christians.

Maher has said that Christians are “part of a dress-up cult that hates sex and worships magic.”

He facetiously urged that Americans convert to Islam because “We’re a nation enthralled to religious fanatics anyway. Does it really matter which fanatics we’re enthralled to? They’re both filled with moral pieties and codes of conduct nobody follows anyway.”

Maher said the Pope a “used to be a Nazi” and the Catholic church is a “child abusing religious cult.”

And the quotes go on and on:

We are a nation that is unenlightened because of religion . . . I think that religion stops people from thinking. I think it justifies crazies. I think that flying planes in a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder. If you look at it logically, it’s something that was drilled into your head when you were a small child.

Of course, believing what was “drilled into your head when you were a small child” may be better than beliefs you embraced as a teenager because living by a Christian moral code turned out to be rather inconvenient.

But the key point is: Maher is a bigot.

We called a local American TV store and asked for the manager, to see whether we could confirm this (was this some sort of wild advertising error by the Shepherd Express? The American logo appears in two different ads in the paper, one on page 3 and the other on page 9).

The manager said he couldn’t confirm it because he didn’t know who Bill Maher is. He also said he didn’t know what the Shepherd Express is.

We asked for the number of a “corporate flack” and he insisted he did not know what a “flack” is. Corporate headquarters in Madison said that no flacks will be in until Monday.

Maher’s intolerant tirades against religion far exceed anything Don Imus said about the Rutgers Women’s basketball team. Corporate America distanced itself from Imus.

Is it OK to attack Christians? And while we are at it, Muslims too?

In the past, we have bought a few things from American. No more.

Marquette Tribune Finally Runs Anti-Abortion Insert

We have blogged on the failure of the Marquette Tribune to run an anti-abortion insert from Pro-Life Wisconsin.

It seems the decison has been reversed, and the insert ran in today’s Tribune, according to a press release from Pro-Life Wisconsin.

We checked copies of he paper, and yes, the insert is there.

Political Jibe of the Day

From a column by Ann Coulter:

Let’s just hope President Obama pays closer attention during national security briefings than he did during 20 years of the Rev. Wright’s church services.