Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers

They're the YouTube awards, and you don't even have to watch them on TV:

Lonelygirl15, OK Go and other YouTube sensations will get an opportunity to walk down a virtual red carpet.

Thevideo-sharing Web site announced Monday that it will hold the firstYouTube Video Awards to recognize the best user-created videos of 2006.

With this kind of thing, there's always a worry whether a new, edgy entity like YouTube is poking fun at the awards show model or whether it's just indulging in the same self-importance of the rest of the entertainment industry. After all, there was a time when MTV's movie and music awards were more a comment on the silliness of awards shows than awards shows in their own right. Nowadays, however, MTV's pageantry can be just as mind-numbing, predictable in its staged wackiness, and achingly long as any other ceremony.

YouTube's awards may meet that fate someday, but they're safe so far, it seems. First, there are only seven categories:

The awards will be handed out in sevencategories: most creative, most inspirational, best series, bestcomedy, musician of the year, best commentary and "most adorable videoever."

Now, I'm a little biased in that I think they could have used a politics category. After all, YouTube has been a serious, driving force in American politics over the past couple of years, and it shouldn't ignore that phenomenon, which will undoubtedly continue to work its Macaca magic on the electoral system.

But I appreciate the minimalism. You can, of course, vote for your favorites, here.

Go enjoy the non-awards show before it eventually turns into an awards show like all the rest. Winners are announced Friday. Another benefit of an Internet awards show-- quicker results.

Yesterday, I commented on Patrick Hynes assertion that it is more important to communicate with voters than with the conservative media.

Of course, he's right: The conservative "insiders" often don't reflect or represent the wishes of conservative voters.  As they say in sports: "That's why we play the games."

Let's not forget that Reagan wasn't the first choice of conservative leaders like Richard Viguerie and Paul Weyrich (who wanted Rep. Phil Crane) for president. But in the 1980 nomination contest, the  voters spoke -- and, as is the case with the "wisdom of crowds" -- the voters knew best.  (By the way, this is proof that no "vast right wing conspiracy" exists).

But part of me still believes that this is a PR move: If the conservative media loves you, you argue they matter; if they don't like you, you argue they are irrelevant, etc.

But I do think that a case could be made that we have created a conservative Intelligentsia that is out of touch with average voters. I mean, does George Will (just using him as an example) have more in common with the average guy living in Iowa, or a liberal in Washington, DC? Philosophically, he may have more in common with the guy in Iowa. But he also reads the same Washington Post -- and shops at the same Whole Foods store -- as everyone else inside the Beltway.  As Rush Limbaugh has argued for decades; it's hard to live in DC (or New York, for that matter), and not lose your moorings. 

The bottom line is that conservative leaders do matter -- but Pat also makes a good piont: Neither George Will, nor Hugh Hewitt, nor Rich Lowry will cast a single vote in Iowa or New Hampshire ...

Using modern technology to reach real voters is something that should be applauded.  Let's see how it works.

I'll have more about media bias on the reporting of the Gathering of Eagles, which has been obvious and prevalent, tomorrow, but this struck me.

In case you ever wondered whether the AP is in agreement with the Sheehan crowd's take on the war in Iraq and the American military in general, look no further than the lede-- that's right, the lede-- of this AP story on the anti-war protests (emphasis mine):

Shivering in the shadow of the Pentagon “Death Star,” chilly protestersraged against the Iraq war Saturday near the symbol of U.S. militarypower – 40 years after activists stormed the building trying to stopanother war.

The Death Star reference, though in quotes, is not attributed to anyone, giving the quote way more credence and credibility as a descriptor than any halfway straight-up reporter would. It's not until the fifth paragraph that you find out it's Cindy Sheehan who said it.

And, just like that, Sheehan's craziest talking point becomes an AP lede. Perhaps "Death Star" will make it into next year's AP Stylebook as synonym for Pentagon.

Ankle Biting Pundit's Patrick Hynes has a good post today about how Sen. McCain is wisely using new media to get his message out.  In doing so, Patrick notes the importance of the conservative media:

"My friend Hugh Hewitt makes a point that candidates for high public office cannot reach their target audiences without the aid of conservative media. Hugh says this not because he is a member of the conservative media, but because it is true. No candidate, including my client John McCain, will successfully navigate the primary process without communicating with and through the talk radio/blog/Podcast/YouTube nexus."

But Patrick goes on to make the case that the conservative media is ... well ... I'll let him explain:

"... conservative media is really just a filter like the Old Media but with more honesty and more entertaining personalities. We can never discount the role of regular people in this process. It is here, in his direct interaction with the people, that I believe my client will have a leg up on the competition in the GOP primary."

Are conservative media the same as the MSM (only more truthful and interesting)?  By virtue of having a megaphone (or a keyboard), are conservative media out-of-touch with "regular people"?  After all, a lot of conservative bloggers and writers live in places like New York, Washington, DC, and California.  Could it be they don't have their fingers on the pulse of America?  Are they "filtering" the good stuff?

Or is this just spin being perpetrated by a campaign that has angered many conservative media-types? 

My suspicion is that if the conservative media are largely against you (as is the case with McCain), you make the argument that the conservative media doesn't matter -- that it's the "real" people out there who matter. 

I'm obviously a bit biased (based on the fact that I write here at Townhall.com). 

What are your thoughts?

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed shocked many Americans with his boastful Guantanamo confession claiming “credit” for some 31 terrorist assaults (including 9/11) and describing foiled attempts to stage many more. The most alarming revelation about this vicious mass murderer, however, involves his background: he received his college education entirely in the United States, subsidized by the generosity of dedicated Christian donors and taxpayers in North Carolina. Born in oil-rich Kuwait to a family of Pakistani ancestry, Mohammed enrolled first at tiny Chowan College, a devout Baptist institution in rural Murfreesboro, North Carolina, and then transferred to the historically black campus of North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University in Greensboro, where he earned a degree in mechanical engineering. In other words, he based his life on murderous hatred and hostility to the United States not because our nation harmed him, but because we helped him; not because he knew nothing about the character of America, but because he, in fact, experienced it first hand. While Dinesh D’Souza argues that Muslim fanatics hate us because our elites have abandoned traditional values, in the case of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed he got to know some of the most wholesome, traditional corners of “red state” America. Those who suggest that we can deflect al Qaeda attempts to destroy us by showing more generosity and openness for the Islamic world ought to consider Mohammed’s sobering example, and to consider what, exactly, North Carolina taxpayers and donors to Chowan College got in return for their generosity in underwriting the education of a criminal, America-hating mastermind.

I was down at the Gathering of Eagles rally this morning on the mall. I filmed a bit, though this is pre-moonbat confrontations, so it's pretty tame.

But the speakers--particularly a WWII vet whose name is not on the line-up, so I'll have to track it down-- were moving, the crowd impressive, and the display of about 10,000 American flags far more beautiful than the rag-tag papier-mache army of the Left nearby.

"We're here in the shadow of the war machine," said anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan.

"It's like being in the shadow of the Death Star."

 It’s strange to watch the rise and fall of various dates on the calendar: Washington’s birthday (February 22) and Lincoln’s birthday (February 12^th) have virtually disappeared as national celebrations, replaced by the brand new commemorations of Martin Luther King Day and the bland, inane, forgettable “Presidents Day.” Meanwhile, Memorial Day (in May) and Veteran’s Day (in November) have become less prominent (despite our appropriate reverence and gratitude for the military) because people regularly confuse the two holidays and their distinctive origins and observances. Labor Day is nothing more than an excuse for a late summer trip (and for politicians to bloviate about the importance of unions) while Valentine’s Day and Halloween are more important, more widely observed  (for better or worse) than ever before. In this context, it’s also fascinating to see the continued popularity (and even a notable rise) of St. Patrick’s Day, by far our most important ethnic holiday. The nation features more German-Americans than Irish-Americans, but the unpleasant history of two World Wars killed any chance for some special commemoration where we all drink beer (or Bier) from steins and gorge ourselves on Sauerkraut and Schnitzel. Cinco de Mayo boasts increasing relevance with the rise of the Mexican-American population but will we ever all try to wear sombreros or serapes on that day the way we all try to wear green on March 17^th? Columbus Day has dramatically declined as a festival of Italian American Identity (though count on Rudy G. to partially revive it) and Pulaski Day may be a big deal in some Polish-American neighborhoods, but there’s no ethnic festival that gets universal, nationwide recognition like St. Paddy’s Day. Yes, it’s partially a beloved occasion because it’s a great excuse to drink, but its enduring observance also reflects the special position of Irish-Americans in our history and our society. As the one of the very first US “ethnic” groups (along with the Germans), and the only one to arrive in the country (mostly) speaking English, Irish have always enjoyed unprecedented prominence and popularity. Please note that there’s no cherished college football team called “The Fighting Greeks” and the only proudly “ethnic” presidents we’ve ever elected have been Irish (Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton all celebrated their connections – in Clinton’s case very tenuous—with the Auld Sod). Unlike all other ethnic stereotypes, nearly all Irish stereotypes are positive – emphasizing likeability, charm, love of music, dance and story-telling, sentimentality, kindly Catholic spirituality, nostalgia for the Emerald Isle, and defiant nationalism against English oppression. Even the legendary taste for whiskey or Guinness becomes something of a positive – especially on March 17^th. On that day, the whole world can participate (and proudly) in the Wearing of the Green. Erin Go Bragh! Happy St. Patrick’s Day.

MOVIE RECOMMENDATION: SPECIAL FOR ST. PATRICK’S DAY

THE QUIET MAN (1952): A glowing, incomparably romantic love letter to his homeland from the great John Ford (real name: Sean Aloysius O’Feeny). John Wayne plays an American boxer who retires from the ring (under complicated circumstances) and returns to his ancestral home where he falls in love with the colorful villagers (Arhut Shields, Ward Bond, Jack McGowran and more) and especially with a fiery, spectacularly gorgeous colleen played by the radiant and passionate Maureen O’Hara. Unfortunately, in order to marry her he must deal with her domineering big brother, Victor McGlaglen. Duke Wayne never generated romantic sparks (full-out flames, actually) the way he does with O’Hara and the lush, folk-infused musical score by Victor Young and sumptuous Technicolor scenery make the film a heart-tugging exercise in longing and nostalgia. Yeah, it’s silly and full of “quaint” stereotypes, but the proceedings remain so loving, sentimental and sincere that the movie remains an irresistible gem (especially for March 17^th).

Seems C-SPAN is showing the moonbat convergence, but not the pro-troops rally.

You can help change that.

Main Number: (202) 737-3220

FAX number 202-737-6226

Here are some more links to sites talking about the American Taxpayer Bill of Rights.

Front Burner:
http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2007/03/14/a-new-contract-with-america/
Free Republic:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1801418/posts
Residual Forces:
http://www.residualforces.com/2007/03/14/the-american-taxpayer-bill-of-rights/
M-Rebman:
http://mrebman.info-blogs.com/?p=3280
Republican News Blog:
http://republicannews.info/63-republican-news-march-14-2007-1232-am
Save the GOP:
http://www.savethegop.com/2007/03/13/rsc-unveils-american-taxpayer-bill-of-rights-to-bloggers/
Fausta's Blog:
http://faustasblog.com/2007/03/bloggers-call-on-proposed-american.html
Amidst the Crowd:
http://amidstthecrowd.com/?p=68
Reason Magazine:
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/119118.html
Jason Pye:
http://www.jasonpye.com/blog/2007/03/rsc_unveils_new_fiscal_strateg.html

Senator Feingold said this yesterday:

“Now, for those who won’t believe that [cutting off funding] has ever been done or that it can't -- or they'd say – it can't be done, let me cite an example from not that long ago. On October 1993, Congress enacted an amendment sponsored by the senior senator from West Virginia cutting off funding – cutting of funding – for military operations in Somalia effective march 31, 1994.”

-- SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D-WI) 03/15/07, Congressional Record

But does he remember this?

BIN LADEN: “We believe that the defeat of America is possible, with the help of God, and is even easier for us, God permitting, than the defeat of the Soviet Union was before.”

Q: “How can you explain that?”

BIN LADEN: We experienced the Americans through our brothers who went into combat against them in Somalia, for example. We found they had no power worthy of mention. There was a huge aura over America -- the United States -- that terrified people even before they entered combat. Our brothers who were here in Afghanistan tested them, and together with some of the mujahedeen in Somalia, God granted them victory. America exited dragging its tails in failure, defeat, and ruin, caring for nothing. America left faster than anyone expected. It forgot all that tremendous media fanfare about the new world order, that it is the master of that order, and that it does whatever it wants. It forgot all of these propositions, gathered up its army, and withdrew in defeat, thanks be to God.”

– OSAMA BIN LADEN, 2001

Once again, liberals would love to play right into the hands of the terrorists.

Well, as we've all heard by now, Democrats will not be participating in a fall debate that was supposed to be hosted by Fox News, because the most-watched cable news network is insufficiently friendly toward them.

Now, Rahm Emanuel is warning freshman Democrats to stay away from Stephen Colbert because, apparently, facing left-leaning, fake newscasters is too risky as well.

So, here at HamNation, Katie Favazza and I have done our best to assemble a crack news team that might  meet the Dems' standards. They're fairer than Katie Couric. Fairer than Jon Stewart. Fairer even than Dan Rather:

When conservatives complain that the liberals are better in the blogosphere, they have a point. Conservatives have used technology like microtargeting to win elections, but the other side has excelled in building a blogosphere community.

Part of the reason for this may be simply that Democrats were out of power when the blogosphere came into existence. For this reason, they may have been more likely to embrace this renegade technology. Additionally, it may be that conservatives are more individualistic, and thus, less likely to work well in a community environment (proponents of this theory argue that there are just as many conservative voices, but that they are not pulling their resources).

While there may be some inherent reasons for liberal domination in the blogosphere, some of the problems may actually be our own fault.

One microcosm that might illustrate the problem is occurring right now at the Politics Online Conference in Washington, DC. Aside from the Townhall team (Kudos to MKH for her Golden Dot Award!), I have spotted a few fellow travellers, including: Patrick Ruffini, David All, and Robert Bluey. In addition, GOP strategists Paul Wilson and Becki Donatelli are both present. I also ran into with some of John McCain's web guys, last night.  And Jim Rowley, Director of Direct Reponses of the RNC, and another Republican, John Simms, are on a panel discussion this morning.

Granted, it is very possible that there are other conservatives here that I haven't seen (or don't know). But it is also clear that a vast majority of the folks attending are liberals. Sometimes these things perpetuate themselves. Conservatives don't want to attend because most of the folks here are liberals. Of course, this thinking makes the problem worse...

The purpose of this conference is to learn from experts about how to use the internet more effectively. Surely, this is something that conservatives and Republicans can benefit from.

It's a shame more of us aren't here...

The Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet held their annual Politics Online conference this week and awarded several Golden Dot awards to "recognize outstanding achievement in the use of the Internet to influence the political process"

And the winner for best video blog is...

Townhall.com's Mary Katharine Ham for her HamNation video blog series.

Congrats MK.