The 4th  Doctor : “You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.”

Doctor Who:  The Face of Evil Episode Four

I remember a great post at the old Eject-Eject-Eject when he talked to a guy who was big into conspiracy theories.  He shot down every piece of “evidence” that was brought forward but the guy kept coming:

Every time I would identify one of these great mysteries, Joe had the same response: okay, but what about this! No fight, no defense — nothing. And then we’d be on to some new blur or smudge that proved, incontrovertibly, that this “reality” we live in is a giant lie, and that we are all victims of Dark Forces moving beyond our control or even our awareness… and that while the sleepwalking sheeple go on with their corporate-controlled lives, the mysterious wheels of the Shadow Government turn inexorably onward, crushing those brave few individuals who are on to the whole horrid plot like so many ants. There is a word for this diseased mental state.

The key part was the “no defense” business.  It didn’t matter what the evidence was, it didn’t matter that he was able to shoot down each bit of nonsense.  There was always a different piece of nonsense that proved we lived in some sort of parallel world that only the very few mystery men knew existed.

That’s what I though of when I saw this:

Because somebody, in my opinion, is paying Lee Stranahan to file these charges against me, in the hopes that I will either break or die.

Seriously Bill Seriously?

Lee Stranahan explained the situation rather clearly:

I have one and only one relationship with Bill Schmalfeldt ; I am a person that he decided to target. I am a victim of his harassment, as are my wife and children.

That’s it. He is the harasser and I am the harassed.

I have said nothing about Bill Schmalfeldt in the past few days except as it relates to his baseless and relentless attacks on me and my family.

If that is even the slightest bit true it would not require anyone to pay Mr. Stranahan to take legal action against you. In fact it would be his duty as a husband and father.

Let’s point out something: As I’m typing this I have a bunch of things to do, I have to upload my radio show, write this week’s under the fedora column, finish my series on George Washington, call customers and take care of some family stuff.

Instead I’m writing a post about a man I’ve never met, who, sans beard, could be used as the model for Sontarians without any makeup. (If he is 5′ 3″ or less the BBC would hire him on the spot and save on makeup) because he’s making trouble for a friend of mine, thus inviting the same kind of grief that Sicilians like myself generally are spared (for whatever reason).

But as I’m writing this, it begs the question, why is Mr. Schmalfeldt’s assertion nonsense squared? There are two simple answers and I’ll take them in order;:

First the idea of ego :

When I say “Bill Schmalfeldt” my readers will first reaction is likely: “Who?” What the hell has he ever done? Who actually knows who what he is doing? Who actually cares? Well one easy measure of his popularity is twitter followers.


Really, you have a guy on twitter with under 150 followers who has his tweets “protected” and people are trying to silence him? Who is actually going to pay money to silence somebody that nobody hears? He doesn’t even qualify as a tree falling in the forest. As Stacy McCain put it:

There’s also Schmalfeldt’s megalomanic persecution complex, as evidenced by his claim that the harassment charges were filed “in the hopes that I will either break or die.”

No, Bill: You were charged with harassment because — wait for it – you were engaged in harassment.

The obsession, the fixation, the inability to step back from the situation and view it with anything like objectivity — these are symptomatic of a deranged mind, and why Schmalfeldt focused his madness on Lee Stranahan is somewhat mysterious. Schmalfeldt started cyberstalking Aaron Walker in June, and peripatetically hopscotched around to attack various other enemies of Brett Kimberlin over the course of ensuing months. In November, Schmalfeldt’s stalking of me escalated to the point that he threatened to contact my wife and sent me more than 200 harassing Twitter messages in the span of 48 hours. And through it all, Schmalfeldt has insisted that his targets deserve his malicious attention, that they are guilty of some heinous wrongdoing that Schmalfeldt is obligated to “investigate” and “expose.”

It seems nothing can dissuade Schmalfeldt from his persistent delusions of grandeur adequacy.

Now by his very existence Mr. Schmalfeldt is loved by God. On a personal level he might be a good father/grandfather and a fine husband and a good neighbor to the people on his street. But that while important on a personal level means little in the arena of ideas. The truth is nobody would bother to pay money to silence him. In fact the only reason why anyone (including me) is currently writing about him or caring about him is the treats to our friend and colleague.

Of course this doesn’t preclude him someday becoming a force for the left. Good writing and hard work can make it happen, but, and perhaps it’s just me but, if you have such a goal in mind, phrases like this might just be counterproductive:

I got some f–king news for you, Stranny — Walker, Hoge, Frey — beware the Ides of March.”

Because nothing says: I’m not harassing anyone nor a threat to people, then quoting a phrase associated with assassination since before the nation formed.

Because we all know Bill Schmalfeldt is a fanatical fan of William Shakespeare.

Second the Red Herring.

Consider Robert Stacy McCain and Lee Stranahan who have spent a fair amount of time writing about Kimberlin, Rauhauser, are nationally known as reporters, they have built up connection networks far and wide and have spent time doing first hand reporting bringing to light subject that the left would rather see left alone.

For a reason totally independent of this post I needed to go to Stranahan’s site today. I was rather amazed that 18 of his last 20 posts concerned Bill Schmalfeldt’s actions vis a vis Lee’s family and the suit. The latest:

Bill Schmalfeldt shows no signs whatsoever of stopping public discussion of his sexual obsession with me and my family. He’s been writing about my wife Lauren for months, in insulting and prurient terms that have including fantasizing about having her perform sexuals acts on him and then do menial labor before discussing the death of our daughter Collette

Meanwhile Robert Stacy McCain has his third post in six days, his 4th this month on Mr. Schmalfeldt, from the latest:

No, Bill, that is what you thought you were doing to Stranahan: You believed Lee was particularly vulnerable to your persistent harassment, and so you kept piling up the attacks, the threats, the smears in expectation of destroying him. And now that Stranahan feels compelled to file criminal charges to end your harasssment, you are projecting your own sadistic motives onto Lee.

Projection is the right word here along with a tad bit of Latin “Cui bono“?

Who benefits from taking two nationally known reporters who have been known to drive stories the MSM has ignored off of whatever they are covering to write about a virtual unknown or better yet, given Lee Stranahan’s readership on twitter:


and Stacy’s


Someone might not pay to have a guy with 150 followers with protected tweets silenced, but I suspect someone might kick in a buck or two to get two guys with a combined twitter followers off of national stories for a bit. Ignoring the multiplicity effect of tweets that would amplify the value of distraction basic math would suggest it is 300 times more likely that someone would pay for someone to keep people like Stacy & Lee busy.

Does that mean someone is paying Mr. Schmalfeldt to make trouble for Lee and/or Stacy? No, there is no evidence I’m aware of and even if someone IS paying Mr. Schmalfeldt, he has as much right to shake his tip jar as anyone else. If someone thinks keeping Stacy & Lee busy is worth paying Mr. Schmalfeldt a few dollars that’s capitalism.

However assuming such a payment is taking place, presumption of innocence not withstanding, given the preliminary hearing on criminal charges against Mr. Schmalfeldt (and others) the question becomes: “Is this a wise investment?”

As any Sicilian can tell you, as long as Mr. Schmalfeldt keeps his mouth shut under oath on the subject, the answer may be yes.

Now I don’t claim to be unbiased here. I’m a friend of both Stacy McCain and Lee Stranahan so feel free to judge my piece accordingly but in terms of the lawsuits being filed in Maryland whether you distrust what I’ve written or accept it as Gospel one thing is for sure. It won’t be boring.

Yes it was easy enough for a private citizen to be a staunch Republican and grumble:  “Why, what could there be simpler than to choose a moment of general tranquility, resign and turn the government over to the Senate.”  The difficulty could only be understood if that private citizen were to become Emperor himself.  It lay in the phrase “moment of  tranquility” there were no moments of tranquility.

Robert Graves Claudius the God 1935


The 3rd of a four-part series of why George Washington Matters, Monday, Washington the Revolutionary, yesterday Washington the General, today Washington the Leader/President

It has become fashionable for some historians to play down George Washington as president and raise more recent people above him.  Abe Lincoln due to his victory in the Civil War gets high marks, FDR’s win in WW 2 and Reagan’s in the Cold War both make them loom large particularly since both Reagan & FDR are still in living Memory and George Washington is from an age so remote to many his presidency becomes ancient history .  You were dealing with a smaller country, less communication,

But to really appreciate Washington the president and the leader you have to look at three specific things.

First Washington at the end of his military career.

Up to the time of Washington and afterwards as well history abounded with examples of leaders of armies who used those armies to take absolute power.  At the end of the War Washington was the single most popular person in America.  As a man with just about everything the only thing he didn’t have was a crown or a title.

It was in his grasp, all he had to do is reach out to have it and he would be the head of an American constitutional monarchy.

And he declined.

It was a move worthy of Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus and a shock to the powerbrokers of Europe.

But as much as it impressed the men of Europe it impressed his countrymen more he presided at the constitutional convention having very little confidence in the resulting system but accepted the presidency when elected unanimously.

This was the 2nd phase.  Despite the lack of confidence in the system he governed with discretion and skill  knowing every action that he would take would be the model for the country to follow and acting in a manner that aided rather than retarded a system that he thought would fail measuring carefully words and deeds for the sake of future generations .

The third phase was the end of his term.  It’s one thing to refuse imperial power when you’ve never had authority, but Washington now had two full terms under him.  He could keep power with the veneer of republicanism  he might have justified serving a 3rd term simply to delay the decent into parties and partisan divisions that already existed.

He did not and when he gave his farewell address assigned the credit for all of his success to the people:

In looking forward to the moment, which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude, which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that Heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; than, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation, which is yet a stranger to it.

In this Washington didn’t just equal Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus who twice gave up power over Rome, he exceeded him by not only giving up power but crediting his success to the people.

It would be 144 years before a president was arrogant enough to consider himself in indispensable.  In closing think of the leaders and the pols of today.  If any of them had the chance for permanent power do you imagine any of them would surrender it?

The nation has seen greatness in the White House, but it has not seen the greatness of a Washington.

Buried in this USA today Story about Al Jazerra coming out of the closet so to speak, actually putting their shingle up in America is a line that might have been easily missed if you are doing a quick read:

Coleman says she watches Al Jazeera simply because it offers so much international news. “It has a lot more foreign correspondents in the field. If you want to know what’s going on in Mali, it’s going to be Al Jazeera that’s covering it. We just don’t have any more foreign correspondents on the ground in (U.S.) television the way Al Jazeera does.”

“Coleman” is Isobel Colemen of the council on Foreign Relations a “non-partisan” Washington think tank. The head of the group since 2003 his Richard Haass who is a regular on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Isabel was asked about the bias’ that might come from Al Jazeera concerning their treatment of Israel & the Arabs (all emphasis mine)

“They’re straight shooters as much as any major news outlet today. There is no unbiased news today,

She continued

“The bias is in the selection of what stories you cover and how you cover them. Al Jazeera will bring its own bias, but it’s no more or no less than what we’re used to already in this country.”

Now readers of this blog have known this for years but what will Chuck “Mythology” Todd say to this? How will he react when a person from an organization whose head, Richard Haass maintains media bias is a fact of life so matter of fact that it’s not worth commenting about?

I suspect it will likely look something like the reaction of Mrs. Merriwether when Rhett Butler bids on Miss Scarlett in Gone with the Wind.

Raj: Howard, wait. Why don’t you use this instead of the PVC to keep the transverse filter assembly in place?

Howard: Because this is not a spare part from the space station. This is the thing from the pizza box that keeps the lid from touching the cheese.

Raj: That what that’s for? In India, the lid just touches the cheese. Of course, we also have rampant poverty and periodic outbreaks of cholera, so a little cardboard in our cheese is no biggie.

The Big Bang Theory, The Classified Materials Turbulence 2009

Yesterday I talked about how the left had left opening for the right over the decades that have allowed people like Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and Fox news drive right through, I also spoke about the irony of Charles Johnson’s attack on Robert Stacy McCain starting me on the path to the following plan

60 donors x Giving $20 x 12 Months = My Paycheck 

Granted this has only worked for two weeks so far but after looking at a twitter debate I’ve seen online yesterday and thinking about something I’ve been thinking about for a long time.

Certain products like (shameless plug alert) the Jerkstopper that anchors your laptop cable to an unused port so it doesn’t get “jerked” out of your laptop and break the power pin work because it fills a need hitherto untouched. The same works with media.  The unwillingness of the MSM to cover important stories as Powerline noted yesterday gives bloggers the ability to be the primer pushers of stories.

Consider the Daily Caller and Senator Menendez, Matthew Boyle has been on this case as the MSM totally ignored the story in favor of Marco Rubio drinking water.  Last night it actually reached the point where CNN led it’s 8PM with a laughable report trying to discredit the story concerning underage hookers while acknowledging corruption under the “everybody does it” meme.

Yet even this coverage in the MSM doesn’t happen without conservative bloggers continuing to push this story over and over again.

And that’s just one example, Think about Robert Stacy McCain on Bret Kimberlin and Lee Stranahan on Steubenville.  You know these stories because they bothered to tell you them and it has cost them.

Now think of the internet as a whole.  How many great conservative bloggers are out there getting you stories others have left behind. Robert Stacy McCain who has traveled the country bringing you stories. Dan Riehl who’s site is a plethora of information, The Conservatory & the Minority Report, aggregate sites bringing you great conservative writing from all over the net. The Lonely Conservative reporting from NY, Jimmie Bise, Jeff Dunetz the Yid with Lid, Pam Geller, Bob Belvedere, Jerry Wilson, William Hoge, Lee Stranahan, Stacy Washington, the Chicks on the Right, Sarah Marie Brenner, Zilla, Katy’s Conservative Corner, Doug Ross, Marathon Pundit, Babalu blog and so many more that I simply can’t list without making this a 10,000 word post.

If you look at my field guide of bloggers the list of conservative bloggers driving liberals nuts on a daily basis is simply boundless.

If only we could fund them.  The funding device to keep bloggers up and running is the small plastic piece that keeps the cardboard out of the cheese, very obvious once you have it, but someone needs to come up with it first.

I have often quoted Jimmie Bise statement concerning a conservative funding

 If conservatives with money would fund places for budding journalists to get their work in front of a decent-sized audience, there would be lots of Bob Novaks, Byron Yorks, Mark Hemingways, Matthew Vadums, and Stacy McCains showing up. Running a web site isn’t the hardest thing in the world to do, but it does take time. There are plenty of folks who could set up and run a site that does original reporting, but they have to have something approaching a credible budget not just to pay for the reporters but also to pay for their own time.

And Stacy McCain:

For the $4 million that the permatanned RINO Charlie Crist collected during that single three-month span of 2009, you could fund eight spiffy little New Media operations for a year (or four such operations for two years). And FEC contribution limits do not apply to people making “investments” in news operations, so that the rich Republicans would not be restricted in their generosity toward New Media, as they are toward political candidates.Soros has figured this out. Rich Republicans have not.

We’ve talked about this for a while and I’ve spoken to bloggers concerning several such idea but the problem has always been access to the type of donors that Karl Rove takes for granted for the seed money and of course there is the issue of being dependent on one or two big donors to keep things going.

and that brings us to my plan built upon the plan I’m using for myself only more dramatic:

6000 people x $20  x 12 months = An Army of Conservative Davids

My personal 60 x $20 x 12 months works out to an annual paycheck of $14,400  multiply that times 100 and suddenly you have a budget of 1.4 million dollars.

What can you fund with $1.4 Mil?  Consider:

Hobby & Green Bloggers/Activists:

There are plenty of people who blog after work, maybe one post a day or the brand new bloggers just getting started.  Their only costs are hosting and maybe the occasional trip.  Under the formula above you could fund 400 such people at $1000 annually to cover their hosting, and perhaps a trip to an event.

 Cost: $400,000

Part Time & Retired Bloggers:

 They might be a housewife or house husband, working part-time.  They might cover events within driving distance and state races.  Perhaps they go to a national conference or three.  You could fund say 100 people $5000 a year to do this.

Cost  $500,000

Full time bloggers:

They will be expected to cover national events in person, flying and traveling, and posting multiple times a day with original reporting and live reports.

Right now nationally we have ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN & FOX.  lets say we double those networks 12 people doing this  and pay them each $35,000 a year out of which they are expected to cover at least one trip every other month. 

That’s $420,000.

Add those numbers up  $400,000 + $500,000 + $420,000 = $1,320,000 to fund 512 bloggers.  (And that still leaves $120K for overhead)

Think of that a second:  512 bloggers posting daily amplifying the conservative message, pushing conservative candidates on the local state and federal level and best of all cross promoting each other and the causes they are pushing.

And also think of the incentive structure.  How many new bloggers might work very hard for the chance to turn that $1000 a year into $5000 or that $5000 a year into a $35,000 annual job (although guys it’s harder work than you think).

And best of all, instead of counting on one or two big donors who might demand certain stories be covered and others not, we would be talking 6000 people all giving a total of $240 a year.

6000 people works out to 120 PER STATE.  Surely we can find 120 people in each state who can spare 20 bucks a month to fund this, after all:

How much would the GOP pay for a minimum of 512 stories on the web promoting their cause?

How much would the various conservative think tanks be willing to pay for hundreds of potential promoters of their studies and their finding?

How much would YOU as a conservative be willing to pay to see this happen?  Would you pay $20 a month?

And what is the left going to do?  Are they going to paint a bunch of middle class folks kicking in $20 a month?  Are they going to have a big expose on a guy with a parts store who gives up 2 trips to Wendy’s or Burger king every month?

If 60 people kicking in $20 a week month to give me a paycheck for a single conservative blog annoys the left, how crazy would over 500 bloggers dogging their candidates and promoting our side do.

I think it’s a worthwhile idea, the problem is can I find 6000 people nationwide who agree?

Update: Stacy McCain notes why the Army of Conservative Davids/Stacy McCains is needed:

Ah, but here comes The Enforcer: Charles Pierce at Esquire attacks Vandehei and Harris from their left flank, signaling that even the mildest media dissent against Dear Leader is unacceptable. Anyone in the D.C. press corps who actually does stray from the fawning pro-Obama herd will be targeted for destruction by MSNBC, by the left blogosphere, by Media Matters and Think Progress.

It’s these enforcer types — Commissars of the People’s Information Bureau, as it were — who make media reform impossible. That’s what Journolist was all about, and you may notice that the Washington Post hasn’t exactly kicked Ezra Klein to the curb.

and at Human Events Newt talks of the innovation the GOP needs

As Reagan biographer Craig Shirley told me, “Commercial radio was a new technology in the early 1930′s and Reagan adapted to it. Talking movies were a new technology in the late 30′s and Reagan adapted to it. Network television was a new technology in the early 1950′s and Reagan adapted to it. If Reagan were alive today, he’d be tweeting.”

This plan, that is innovation.

Update 2: Typo corrected “week” to “Month” in 2nd to last paragraph.

[thermometer raised=35 target=300 height =200 ]

A journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step and the journey to the $300 paycheck this week is taking baby steps as we have moved $10 closer than yesterday. Thus we are still 13 1/4 $20 hits this week away from three hundred but I’m an optimist at heart.

You can fuel that optimism with a click on the button below. After all why send the money to HBO this month when they will just use it to hit conservatives?