"Your Comment is Awaiting Moderation"

After posting this, I posted this in Fox News site comments:

Note the number and the time.

This is where it's currently at:

And it's not because I left a link: first of all, it's their system that makes it active, plus others have left links in their posts (for instance, see Comment #18). And I didn't violate any standards by using bad words, insults...

I think it's safe to say they don't care for what I'm proposing. It's not in their interests.

Think about that for a moment, and ask yourself if this seems like the actions of honest and ethical journalists whose interests are to bring unbiased information to the electorate, you know, as in "We report, you decide."

UPDATE: It's finally made it--looks like my comment poster Bob in Sea Tac was right, and it was a matter of them being overwhelmed.

Paul Campaign: Make Lemons Out of Lemonade

We talked about this in passing here.

Now it looks like Ron Paul will be allowed to participate in the ABC debates.

"Fair and Balanced" and "conservative" Faux News will not allow him to appear, even though he finished in Iowa far ahead of Sean Hannity darling Rudy Giuliani, who is invited, and is polling far ahead of Fred Thompson, also an invitee, in New Hampshire.

You shouldn't need to be a Paul supporter to be outraged by this manipulation of the electorate by corporate media special interests. There are two things his supporters are encouraging us to do:

Leave a comment for the Faux propagandists at their "You Decide '08" page, and visit the "Protest Fox" webpage and learn how to send an email or two.

These are both good actions, and I will do them this weekend, but it's also time for some real creative and outside the box thinking from the Paul campaign team--immediate action. If negotiations are unsuccessful at getting their candidate in at the last minute, they should do three things--they should be starting on them now:

1. Use a portion of that $20M they've raised to buy a 1-minute ad for Ron to be aired immediately before the debate--if not on Fox, then on their competitor CNN. The content of the ad should be to call attention to his exclusion, to provide an overview of his message, and to direct viewers to #2,

2. Have Ron live on the Internet at the same time as the debate, answering all questions posed to the candidates on the Fox program. This could actually work to his advantage, as there'd be no distractions from other candidates, no questions intentionally leaving him out, and no misrepresentations of his positions or statements by the other candidates. It could also draw a significant portion of the audience away from Fox.

3. Publicize the hell out of this. Issue press releases to get it into the news. Use the unprecedented Internet network Paul supporters have established.

I have no real hopes that this will be done as I have no real influence with the Paul campaign. But I think if he did this, the wave of publicity and curiosity and potential for getting his message out could be tremendous. But if they're going to do it, they need to do it NOW, because the debate is tomorrow.

If you agree, contact the Paul campaign and tell them so. If they want to make this happen, nobody's going to go to bed tonight.

CeaseFire PA Director's Watch: 01/05/08

Well, it's Saturday. They're probably sleeping in.

NRA-ILA Responds on Sullivan

All of us who wrote got the same letter (thanks to everyone who forwarded theirs), and Armed and Safe presents it and pretty well sums everything up, so I won't duplicate that here.

It's what I expected when I said they didn't want to give an unequivocal "yes" or "no" answer. Their world is too labyrinthine for directness, and they're counting on being a force of influence on pending legislation. As such, they'll do nothing to alienate or jeopardize access, which, for lobbyists, is everything.

And this way, if and when "Maximum Mike" is confirmed, they will not have been among his assailants, providing additional capital.

If nothing else, it's masterful political judo, turning this to their advantage. And here's the other thing: While the rest of us are making noise, they're in there quietly behind the scenes working on legislation that should provide relief for some of the more egregious determinations of dealer noncompliance, such as abbreviations on forms...

And while the rest of us want nothing less than elimination of BATFU, well, really, if that's going to happen, how? Who's leading the effort, how much support and resources do they have, how many sponsors in the legislature...? Truth is, no one has assembled that army, let alone taken the first step to make it happen.

So, what, have I given up? Can I now expect comments about selling out, or asking who got to me?

No, not at all to the first, probably to the second. I'm just laying out the way things are--if we refuse to see them because they piss us off, well, nobody ever won anything through self-imposed blindness. And those of you who decry the NRA's position without anticipating and understanding the rationale for defending it will not be well served.

This Day in History: January 5

During the chilly late afternoon of January 5, 1781, Virginia Governor Thomas Jefferson stood helpless at his vantage point in Manchester as he watched warehouses and workshops in Richmond burn. Traitorous General Benedict Arnold, who hadn’t received a satisfactory response to his demand for the surrender of the one-year-old capital of Virginia, was torching the town.

It helps to recall the traitor Arnold when the other side trots out some former military man to use as a prop, as if that should trump reason. Bravery is admirable, but it does not excuse bad motives.