In Praise of Edgar Mevers....
Topic: the Denver media and me
The locally-produced public-service programs carried on the Public Broadcasting System's Boulder, Colorado affiliate (Boulder is where good liberals hope they go when they die) rarely fail to entertain, usually unintentionally. I'm reporting their latest comic coup while it is still fresh - the host only came out with it seven minutes ago (that would have been seven pm, March the second, but this account has been edited several times since then. Present tense references reflect passages written while I was watching the show).

One of the station's reliably left-wing panel discussion programs is even as I type this hosting three African-Americans, two professors and a student at the University of Colorado's home campus at Boulder, to talk about how there's STILL a civil rights problem in this country. I agree that there still is one, but I doubt that it is big and severe enough to justify the trillion-dollar governmental-industrial complex which has formed to address it. The professors on the panel probably owe the funding of their chairs to this complex, pervasive civil rights industry.

Anyway, the host of the program (an unadjectival American) was beginning it with a rapid-fire summation of the civil rights movement, when he started talking about the names of some of the pioneers of the movement and came out with "such as Edgar Mevers," stumbled, looked perplexed, then repeated "Edgar Mevers" before going on with his spiel and starting the show.

The program's host is STILL really, really uncomfortable - in fact, all four men around the table are really looking uncomfortable - and just threw out an observation about whether he was accurately reading other people's minds, and I hope for his sake that this was just a metaphor that crashed and burned.

Now one of the professors is relating the story of being hauled over for nudging over the speed limit, being caught with an expired out-of-state driver's license (we viewers didn't learn that little detail until the program's host called him on whether, as the professor tried to suggest, the arrest was racially-motivated), then arrested.

That story was intended to illustrate racial intolerance as it now exists, which goes to show that the professor leads a sheltered life.

Breakdown of the incident - A cop enforced the highway speed laws of Colorado and thus discovered a violation of the laws governing driver registration, and enforced those laws too. If the officer on the scene had decided to NOT enforce the law, THAT could have been taken as an act performed for racial motives by members of other ethnic groups.

Even I, a white conservative, have seen worse examples of intolerance than that - not much worse lately, thank God, not very many, not all against African Americans, but that the virus of intolerance exists at all is an unfortunate effect of free will. Freedom of action entails freedom to take reprehensible action, and attempts to prevent every possible reprehensible action usually result in governmental actions which are too often themselves reprehensible. That situation is called a "police state."

Now, one of my sons, who is tall, blond, blue-eyed and unquestionably European-American has also been hauled in for an expired driver's license, so the professor's premise (in that particular case) is pretty much invalid from the word go as far as I'm concerned.

Kudos to the program's host for being awake and sceptical even though he was clearly bubbling over with white liberal guilt. Despite my ribbing him over "Edgar Mevers," the guy manages to be sharp and focused, no mean feat when his show consists of, say, gender-indeterminate members of some Boulder-based political movement or another who manage to make the Daily Kos seem like the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.

If you're going nuts over who "Edgar Mevers" is, the program host was thinking of former Mississippi civil rights activist and later, mayor Medgar Evers. Rest in peace, Mr. Evers.

As a conservative (who acknowledges that civil rights wouldn't have happened as soon as it did unless a lot of gutsy liberals and just plain gutsy people had marched and demionstrated and gotten sprayed by fire hoses amd tear-gassed and bitten by German Shepherds and beaten and shot by cops and Klansmen - and after the South got the point, some of those folks had to go back home to the North and get hosed, gassed, dog-bitten, beaten and shot all over again over integration in the 1970s and 1980s) I like the idea that I knew Medgar Evers' name and the program host, a professional knee-jerk liberal, didn't.

Hah.

(And if anyone is really named Edgar Mevers, this does not refer to you. Any references to a real Edgar Mevers, living or dead, corporeal or incorporeal, actual or conjectural, tangible or spectral are purely coincidental.)

And the Denver-area winner in the category, "Pot Calling the Kettle Ugly" is....
Topic: the Denver media and me
The Denver Post, in its op-ed section (called "Perspectives," even though the appearance of more than one perspective among its op-ed columns would be remarkable) joined the pile of Democratic political hacks punching, kicking and shivving Sen. Zell Miller in the back for daring to state the obvious - the national Democratic Party just... doesn't... get it.

In his speech before the Republican Convention, Senator Miller doubtless spoke what is on many minds within the Democratic Party - that John Forbes Kerry is the last man we should be considering electing President of the United States.

And Senator Miller is right.

But the Denver Post apparently doesn't think that Senator Miller's right to speak freely counts as much as party loyalty.

The only op-ed piece they ran on the story was "Tone of politics gets ugly," by former Colorado state treasurer and lieutenant-governor, Democratic candidate for Governor, and Clinton-appointed United States Ambassador Gail Schoettler.

Ms. Schoettler didn't pull any punches. She described Miller's speech at the Republican National Convention as a "vitriolic attack on Democrats, his party," and went on for ten vitriolic paragraphs, calling Sen. Miller "simply pathetic" and a "dyspeptic ingrate."

Schoettler also managed to spin Zell Miller's remarks into an ominous foreshadowing of an age of political ugliness.

Ambassador Schoettler's duties at the World Radiocommunication Conference in Turkey in 2000 must have prevented her from seeing how ugly her own party can get, as when Linda Tripp's character was expertly assassinated by the White House and their host of allies in the news and entertainment complex, while she and her family were physically threatened by Clinton-friendly thugs and her personnel records illegally released by the Pentagon - the exact same criminal offense for which Chuck Colson was thrown in jail.

But that's ancient history, right? Fine.

What about when moveon.org took out ads saying that Bush was like Hitler? (never mind the rest of moveon.org's rabid line of hate propaganda against Bush, Cheney and the Republican Party)

And when someone who dared to shout a question critical of John Kerry was carried out of one of his rallies in Ohio in a headlock? (nothing like the good old Third World Dictator Ton Ton Macoutes approach to dissent, is there?)

And when the lies about a corrupt connection between Halliburton and the White House are carried as straight news by Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News?

And when a number of disgruntled former employees of the Bush White House and Kerry campaign staffers are interviewed by 60 Minutes with slloooowww sympathetic softball-pitch questions?

And when MSNBC's senior political analyst and McLaughlin Group panelist Lawrence O'Donnell called Zell Miller "crazy" and "a liar" - no, THAT'S not ugly, is it?

I had to chuckle - the resulting torrent of Email and other correspondence condemning O'Donnell's moronic comments about Miller provoked a hand-wringing session on the next McLaughlin Group about how very, very hard it is to be a modern journalist and risk the wrath of lots of ticked-off readers or viewers, since the Democratic Party doesn't control blogs and Email the way it does the print and broadcast media - yet.

The problem with Ambassador Schoettler's article is that she mixes up ordinary, rank-and-file Democrats - almost all of whom, especially the vast majority of their local activists, are good, decent people who participate in politics because they care about their country and other people - with the national Democratic Party and the DNC, cynical players of dirty politics devoted to the personal destruction of their enemies and totally unworthy of their supporters - as evident from their behavior.

I decided to send a quick, under-200 word note (thus complying with their "letters guidelines") to the Denver Post's "OpenForum" page (Orwellian irony is apparently their long suit) commenting on Amb. Schoettler's column:

"Dear Editor:

Denver Post columnist (and longtime Democrat office-holder) Gail Schoettler's personal attack on Senator Zell Miller:

(a) shows the utter hypocrisy of Schoettler's party and the media - moveon.org can run ads comparing Bush to Hitler, Kerry's trained seals can pour tons of vitriol on the President and the people who support him, but the Denver Post and the other news media only discover that the "Tone of Politics Gets Ugly" when a Bush supporter speaks about the Democratic Party's disconnect from morality, reality and about half of the people;

(b) illustrates the Democratic Party's damage control procedures -

When someone washes the Democrats' dirty undies in public:

First, assassinate his or her character (remember Linda Tripp and Ken Starr?);

Second, whine about "divisive" and "vitriolic" comments if there is no way to disprove them or, as in Senator Miller's case, they are so obviously true that even character assassination won't work.

Also, Ms. Schoettler is wrong - the voters of Georgia put Zell Miller in office and kept him there, not the Democratic Party.

Vance P. Frickey, Denver, CO

NOTE TO EDITOR: LETTER TO THE EDITOR ENDS WITH PRECEDING LINE

Documentation of compliance with "Letters Guidelines," the Denver Post, Sunday, September 12, 2004, Page 2E:

Word count (from Microsoft Word "File, Properties, Statistics"): 180 words between "Dear Editor" and "Vance P. Frickey, Denver, CO," inclusive.

Request: please advise me if you (a) either find it impossible to publish the letter without removing any of my carefully chosen words or (b) would like to propose the removal of any such words prior to publication

Accuracy of comments: much greater than the comments made by Ms. Schoettler in the column to which I responded. If Zell Miller's speech at the Republican Convention was "a vitriolic attack," her own comments on Senator Miller stopped just short of an episode of Tourette's Syndrome, and you printed them.

Apart from that, how does one evaluate the "accuracy" of another person's opinion? Isn't that the sort of thing done in the People's Republic of Vietnam?

I only ask because the rules of journalism seem to have changed dramatically from my last formal exposure to them in high school journalism class. In particular, someone seems to have repealed the Canons of Journalism with regard to things like objectivity, apparent and actual conflict of interest (although I do applaud your disclosure of Gail Schoettler's long history as a Democratic Party office holder and operative at the end of her column), and balanced presentation of viewpoints. Just read "Perspectives" if you don't see what I mean - every syndicated and locally written op-ed column represents ONE perspective - the view from left-of-center.

Requested contact information (please withhold any and all such information from publication or casual disclosure outside of the editorial process):

Vance P. Frickey

(mailing address) (blogger note: withheld here in the blog because a tiny minority of the Democratic Party's activist base deals in physical intimidation, including vandalism and pet murder)

(day and evening telephone) (blogger note: ditto)

(Email) (blogger note: ditto)"

Of course, the last time I sent a letter to OpenForum, they couldn't use it.

Thank God for the blogosphere, huh?

How does this letter to the editor selection stuff work?
Mood:  not sure
Topic: the Denver media and me
The editor of the weekend op-ed section at the The Denver Post, "Open Forum," asked readers for "your thoughts on Medicaid and other health-cost issues" after running not one, but two columns on the front page of his section in the Sunday Post on why Colorado Medicaid doesn't pick up the tab for dental care and chiropractic treatments among other services which are on the Medicaid menu in other states, but not here.

At ten-ish this morning, I got a call from a nice young lady from the Post asking whether I wanted my letter to run in their newspaper. I missed being able to take the call in person owing to acute, very late-stage post-prandial indisposition, but have it on voice mail. I can't say this enough, she was as nice as she could be.

Then, I got the following Email from the editor of the weekend op-ed section of The Denver Post at 4:43 pm (all times I used are US/Canadian Mountain Time, GMT-07:00) this afternoon:

"Thanks for this submission. It's not something we can use at this time, but we appreciate your thinking of The Post.

Todd Editor
Assistant Editorial Page Editor, The Denver Post
teditor@denverpost.com
(303) 820-1650
1560 Broadway, Denver, Colorado 80202

-----Original Message-----
From: Vance P. Frickey [mailto:vfrickey@omitted on this blog because I'm not a moron.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 3:54 PM
To: openforum@denverpost.com
Subject: Colorado Medicaid and why we can't fund it all...

Mr. Todd Editor, Perpsectives Editor
The Denver Post

Dear Editor:

The cost of medical care is out of control in Colorado and everywhere else in the US because we don't have medical tort reform - but we do have a healthy, multi-billion dollar national industry of suing doctors, hospitals
and drug companies.

This reduces both the effectiveness of Medicaid funding in Colorado and its availability. Every dollar diverted from provision of medical care to the pockets of trial lawyers contracts the economy, prolonging the recession and reducing tax revenues.

Two of the reasons why Colorado can't afford to fund Medicaid as completely as other states are the same reasons Senator John Edwards and other trial lawyers practice here in the US and not in Canada:

First, Canada has the sort of medical tort reform that John Kerry, John Edwards, and other Democrats in the United States Senate oppose. Trial
lawyers liked the Democratic Party so much, they bought it.

Second, filing nuisance lawsuits in Canada is a losing game, financially. In Canada, when someone brings such a lawsuit and loses, they pay their
opponents' reasonable legal costs and their own.

Vance P. Frickey, Denver

(Please do not publish my street address or telephone number, as the Democratic Party has FAR too many activists who are unfortunately prone to
personal violence and harassment against their opponents, and we'd prefer not to lose another house cat.)

home address:
(omitted on this blog because I'm not a moron)

day/evening time phone number:
(omitted on this blog because, etc, etc)

Before editing this letter for ANY reason, please advise me of intended changes by Email to vfrickey@(omitted on this blog.com)."

Now, I went all the way to comply with the requirements set forth on the second page of the weekend op-ed section for people who want to state their opinion.

I gave my home address and phone number to people I don't know from Adam, and on whose favored Presidential and vice-Presidential candidate I may have just placed partial blame for the rape of our medical health industry by Kerry and Edwards' major Senatorial clients... but I wanted my say on the topic.

My word processor tells me that there were fewer than 200 words in the piece between "Dear Editor" and "Vance P. Frickey, Denver," inclusive, as specified in the editor's instructions.

I did ask the editor to inform me beforehand if he intended to edit my letter for "length, grammar or inaccuracy.
____

I want to be very careful here. I don't know the editor of the "Perspective" section of the Denver Post from Adam's cat. I have no idea whatsoever of his political leanings, personal beliefs, or professional standing, nor any interest in them apart from whether they affect the views allowed to be presented in Denver's largest newspaper.

But I think we should look at what's on last Sunday's "Perspectives" section, just on the off chance that we can learn something about how the process of selecting letters to the editor works at the Denver Post....

Last Sunday's "Perspectives" topic was "The Race for the United States Senate: Pete Coors vs. Ken Salazar"

The letters which made the cut (quoted in their entirety, the authors' names omitted):

Letter #1

"Republican Senate candidate Pete Coors says we should we should elect him to the U.S. Senate because the Senate has too many lawyers and he's businessman, not a lawyer.

"Actually, the Senate has too many white, male millionaires who know next to nothing about how most Americans really live.

"Besides, we already have a white, male businessman who knows next to nothing as president. For crying out loud, why would we want to compound our error by sending another such character to Washington?"

letter #2

"Re: 'Abortion coverage finding spotlight, Aug. 18 business news story'.

"Pete Coors compares face jobs and breast implants with abortion. It is no wonder he is opposed to abortion if he has no better understanding than that. Who is going to raise those kids, Pete? Are you going to guarantee them the basics required to have a reasonably healthy, happy life? When calling abortion a "voluntary medical procedure," one should first think of the alternative, that is, the risk of raising an unhealthy child because there aren't enough resources for his or her needs. I call that a necessary medical procedure. It is a rare woman who is faced with a pregnancy and does not think about all those things before deciding what must be done."

letter #3

"Re:'Hopefuls sidestep religion,' and 'Bishops plant seeds on the political field,' Aug. 16 news stories.

"Your articles were interesting, but incomplete. The Senate candidates and the bishops also need to address the issues of U.S. policy regarding transubstantiation, the assumption of the Virgin, and the infallibility of the Pope.

"We don't want any surprises after the election, so let's get this all out in the open now!"

letter #4

"Bob Schaeffer campaigned for the Republican Senate nomination with the full backing of the Christian conservatives and repeatedly referenced his faith in God. However, after the primary election, Pete Coors thanked God a few times for his victory over Schaeffer, so apparently God was really on his side, although she may not have tipped her hand to Schaeffer. Finally, in an interview with the Denver Post, Ken Salazar states that the November election is 'in God's hands.' How is one God going to select so many candidates clamoring for her support?"

Is it just me, or is there a theme, a sameness among the letters (apart from the fact that they were all in the 80 to 130-word range)? Perhaps a slight clustering of the political data points leftward?

Or am I just suffering from sour grapes at not being invited to clutter up the "Perspectives" section of the Denver Post with what appears to be a missing reader perspective?

I mean, if this were Boulder and not metropolitan Denver (I live in Diana DeGetteville, myself), I'd buy last Sunday's spectrum of opinions as representative of the community's views.

But somehow I don't think the "let's kill unborn babies because they might grow up poor" letter is representative of how most Denverites think. Neither is all the smarting-off in which two of the lucky selectees for publication indulged about a God in Whom I and most of my neighbors believe in strongly.

I think all the people whose letters Todd Editor chose for publication deserve to be heard, just as much as the rest of us in Denver. But these people sound as though they all hang out at the same Starbucks, which means we readers of the Denver Post are getting not "Perspectives," but one "Perspective" - two, tops.

If these letter writers' perspectives are an accurate reflection of how people in this town think, Denver would be a much different town than the one my friends, my wife and I see every day.

Maybe the Denver Post is trying to gain street cred among big-city daily newspapers by running a weekend science fiction feature in its op-ed section - to complement Molly Ivins' fantasy column.

Lately, Molly Ivins seems to be writing about some parallel universe in which Kerry hadn't tried to parlay his war record into support among veterans, only to make them remember that he called them rapists and murderers back in his Viet-Cong flag-loving, working for the North Vietnamese as a Congressional lobbyist and giving them crucial pointers during the Paris Peace Talks days. Here's a tip, Molly - get a BIG advance if you want to slap hard covers around your collected Ravings for Kerry.