I spent much of today guest-hosting for Rush on America's Number One radio show. In a burst of generosity, I offered millennial snowflakes a Black Friday two-for-one triggering deal: if you call in for one micro-aggression, I'll commit a second micro-aggression against you entirely for free! You can find a few moments from the show here:
Three months ago when I was here, I said Donald Trump would win the election, when all the smart people said Hillary would triumph. So I have nothing to prove. Trump exploded the entire concept of conventional wisdom on November 8th.
I also tipped my hat to a famously lovely lady who died on Thanksgiving, Florence Henderson - and, apropos an interminable effort to bring in a "flute player" for my forthcoming TV show, resolved the burning question of the day:
So I decided to settle it:
I'm for flautist. If you've got it, flaut it.
Among the mail I received during the show was this cheery missive from Dennis Owens of Moose Pass:
Why don't you stay the f**k in Canada you f**king know it all. There are just a whole lot of people who don't give a f**k what you say.
Mr Owens underlined a point I'd made earlier: There is nobody on the right who is unaware that "a whole lot of people don't give a f**k" about what we say. We're aware of that every time we switch on TV or open a newspaper - which is why we understand we have to be in the persuasion business. It's the other guys who are in need of Mr Owens' advice: as I explained on the show, the reason the Democrats were stunned circa 10pm Eastern on Tuesday night was because Christiane Amanpour had assured Hillary Clinton it was in the bag and Hillary Clinton had assured Christiane Amanpour it was in the bag and they were trapped in their circular bubble. As for not "giving a f**k what you say", that might more usefully be directed at Katy Perry and Lady Gaga and John Oliver and all the rest, who, as Kathy Shaidle says, got Trump elected.
~Along the way on EIB, I mentioned a certain forthcoming Mark Steyn Show:
Every so often, someone's kind enough to say, 'We quite like these once-every-three-months appearances on the Rush show, but why don't you try working a bit more regularly?' You're a fool to get into talk radio, because nobody can compete with Rush, and this is the only show I want to sit behind the microphone of. I love making guest appearances here. But TV is a different matter. So I'm launching The Mark Steyn Show on December 5th.
You can find out more about the show here. It's five nights a week - or days, if you prefer to dial us up in the morning or afternoon; or weekends, if you'd rather binge-watch all day long on Saturday. You can catch the show on your TV or telephone, Amazon or iPad, whatever you so desire. We'll have all the big geopolitical stuff, but we'll also make time for the fun things in life, too. It's a great Christmas gift - and you get not only The Mark Steyn Show but all of CRTV's other great content as hosted by the likes of Michelle Malkin, Steven Crowder and Mark Levin. And, if you take advantage of the special seasonal offer, you also get a free copy of my book The [Un]documented Mark Steyn, which Rush called "a must-read". Simply enter promo code STEYN BOOK CLUB at checkout.
~And finally two years ago today I was in a DC courthouse listening to their lordships (or whatever you call them here) quiz the parties in the matter of Big Climate vs Free Speech. Since then the lethargic jurists of the DC bench have sat on their hands and kept the case in courthouse purgatory. In The Washington Post, Jonathan Adler provides his annual update:
As I've noted before, I think this should be a relatively easy case. However offensive or intemperate the posts at issue, they should be recognized as protected speech... Under Mann's theory, George Zimmerman could sue anyone who claimed he "got away with murder" after killing Trayvon Martin. (Ditto equivalent claims about O.J. Simpson, Timothy Loehmann, etc.). It's no wonder that so many media groups and others filed amicus briefs on the defendants' behalf.
Although this case arises out of a dispute over climate change, that's not what the case is about. Climate change is a serious problem, and one that policymakers need to do more to address. But legitimate concern about climate change should not be a pretense for chilling protected speech, whether by independent advocacy groups, opinion publications or others. Environmental concern is no reason to abandon constitutional principle or to dampen freedom of speech.
Yeah, big deal. As I always say, the process is the punishment. So the incompetent judges who presumed to exercise jurisdiction over my right to free speech have let the case sit there for another two years. Truly, the DC court system merits only contempt.