How NOT to attract customers to your restaurant on Sundays

On Sunday morning, as we usually do, we, the Snowed family, had had a great morning at our church and were walking back to the car.  And what do we find on our windshield but a flyer advertising specials at a nearby restaurant.

Okay, I'm sorry, but I find placing flyers on windshields of cars in church parking lots to be incredibly tacky.  (I don't really care for it the rest of the week, either, but I find this worse.)  Mrs. Snowed came right out and said this made her much less likely to visit this restaurant in the future, and I tend to agree with her.  To me, finding a flyer on my windshield after church is about the same as getting obtrusive sales calls at home during dinner.

But maybe I'm wrong.  Has placing junk advertising on people's windshields while they are at church become an acceptable technique?  Am I being overly sensitive?  Or do you believe this is annoying, if not invasive?

Another Austin radio change: 92.5 FM

The oldies format has returned to Austin's FM airwaves, courtesy 92.5 KXXS.  Less than a month ago, the station switched, along with its simulcast partner, 104.9 KTXX, to sports/ESPN; now, the station has adopted Scott Shannon's True Oldies Channel (ending its simulcast with KTXX).

The True Oldies Channel is a satellite-based station which plays songs from the late 50s to the late 70s (see, for example, their recent playlist using this link) and claims to have a much larger library than most terrestrial oldies stations.  Whether that is true remains to be seen, but according to at least one person who has already heard the format here in Austin, nary a human voice has been heard.  (Aside:  I don't necessarily think that constitutes much of a problem, given people's use of iPods and the link, and also given Bob FM's success despite (or because of) their being mostly jockless.

This change to KXXS represents the first real return of the oldies format to Austin, since "Oldies 103" became Bob FM in 2004.  Sure, there have been rather half-baked attempts to bring oldies back to Austin before, such as KITY (whose website still erroneously claims to have a translator in Austin) or Majic 95.5's subchannel, KKMJ-HD2 (which, last I heard, was playing 60s-70s oldies, but I can't verify, as I do not have an HD radio), but KXXS is the first real attempt at an oldies format on FM in Austin.  Oldies 103 consistently pulled top-ten ratings in this market, so this could be a pretty good move for KXXS, though the target audience of oldies may be getting too old for advertisers' tastes.

KXXS has filed with the FCC to move its city of license from Elgin to Sunset Valley; this can only help its penetration in the Austin market.  The oldies format should also be a draw for listeners of stations which have recently switched to all-Christmas music (Majic, The River), and so I would not be surprised to see a major improvement in the ratings for KXXS in the near future.

Update 8/15/11:  People looking for the oldies format should check out 98.9 in the future; see here for details.

2009 Online Red Kettle

Once again, the Salvation Army is allowing for the setup of virtual red kettles for online donations, for those people who are either:  1) done with their shopping; 2) so averse to shopping that they will wait until December 24th to think about entering a store (and if you are related to one of these types, my condolences to you); or 3) those people who prefer to plan out their donations in advance.

So, if you would like to donate through my virtual kettle, you can do so by clicking the kettle below:

Thanks in advance for your donations.

Opinion: Tina Brown's analysis of Sarah Palin, followers based on total ignorance

In case you weren't watching MSNBC this morning (yeah, neither was I), Tina Brown appeared on Morning Joe.  Tina Brown, if you don't remember (as I didn't), is apparently some sort of journalist/author/expert-on-everything*; she is apparently also one of the many liberals who thinks they have a unique insight into the minds of conservatives.  (MSNBC seems to attract these types for some reason.)

Anyway, Ms. Brown chose to focus her piercing insight into the minds of people with whom she disagrees on the current very popular book tour of one Sarah Palin.  Apparently Governor Palin and President Obama have quite similar approval ratings, and this just would not stand, and so Ms. Brown stated that Gov. Palin's confidence is based on "total ignorance", and that there was "no substance to any of her arguments."  Video follows:



Let's get this straight, Ms. Brown:  the lion's share of Sarah Palin's popularity is not about hating anyone else.  (I'm not gonna speak for everyone, though Ms. Brown seemingly has no problem doing so.)  Sarah Palin represents the direction in which we would like this country to go:  smaller government (particularly less governmental intrusion into our lives, such as, for example, cap-n-tax, healthcare takeovers, etc.), energy independence using all resources (rather than kneecapping ourselves), and basically allowing business to do what it does quite well on its own, which is to create jobs and resources without the government's help.

And to say that Gov. Palin is not knowledgeable is pretty darn ignorant, to say the least.  Look, for example, here, here, and here for some examples of substance-rich, well-written columns about real issues.

So who's operating out of total ignorance here, Ms. Brown?

*Information from Wikipedia must be taken with the usual several grains of salt.

How NOT to attract customers with your junk fax

As a public service to junk fax spammers, I present the following list of things you shouldn't do if you want to attract customers, based on the incredibly dumb fax I pulled off the machine this morning.

Things Not To Do:

1.  Send junk faxes in the first place.

Well, that seems rather obvious, doesn't it?  I mean, it is possible, if you're clueless enough to put your contact information on your fax, for the recipient to sue you (this site shows how).  But let's assume that you've already decided to send your junk fax and deal with the consequences, of which you are sure there will be none.


2a.  Don't put your contact information on the fax except for a toll-free number, or
2b.  Be located somewhere other than the United States.

This just screams out "I am not to be trusted!" for US customers.  Heck, why not just include a solicitation for me to help you get my long-lost relative's money out of Nigeria?  (Aside:  our company actually did just receive a similar fax.  Apparently e-mail is too advanced for some people...)  Let's face it, there are not a lot of things that most companies need for which they need to contact foreign entities.  And that is particularly true for the service offered in today's offending fax (more on that later).

3.  Use misleading information/make your customer think they'll be getting something for nothing.

What, do some companies just not read their faxes before responding with "Golly gee, that sounds like a great idea!" or something?  Today's offender, yellowpage-texas.com (no link--it's not worth it), is offering, of course, the wonderful opportunity to have our company listed on their website.  And even better:  their offer includes free submission to Google!  Um, yeah, the real Yellow Pages (and AT&T's online site, yellowpages.com) already list us, thanks.  And, actually, so does Google.  And it has for years.

Oh, and I didn't mention:  this wonderful submission to this other non-AT&T-or-any-other-reputable-company-that-I-know-of site costs only $89 per month (!!) for two years.  That's rather hidden in the small print.  So, if someone responded to this and thought it was free, they'd be on the hook for $2,136.

Now, if those three items weren't enough, this last one's way over the top:

4.  Use a blatantly insulting gesture as your logo.

Seriously, what were you thinking?  This company decided it would be great to flip AT&T's traditional Yellow Pages logo (and isn't it still trademarked?) upside-down and assume no one would notice.  Well, first of all, if the two fingers are pointing up, it no longer means that you are letting your fingers do the walking (remember that?  I'm old), but also, in some countries, it is a very insulting gesture. 

The UK, as anyone who has watched Are You Being Served? knows, is one of the countries in which this gesture is seen as an insult.  And where is yellowpage-texas.com's parent company based?  You guessed it:  Manchester, UK.  I'm quite sure that the owners knew what they were doing:  they were basically flipping the bird to prospective clients and assuming no one would notice.

So, there you have it, junk fax senders.  Happy spamming!

Entertainment Tonight whines: Sarah won't talk to us!

Remember Diane Dimond?  She is probably best known for breaking the Michael Jackson scandals that dogged him for the last 15 years of his life.  She worked on a couple of reputable news networks (or quasi-reputable, in the case of MSNBC) for a while.  But now poor Ms. Dimond has fallen on hard times, apparently, as she is slumming with that bastion of hard news, Entertainment Tonight.

Currently, ET has Ms. Dimond following the Sarah Palin Going Rogue tour.  (Here's the link one more time.  Disclosure:  if you buy using the link, I get money.  So buy it!)  For the past several days, Ms. Dimond has reported on the thousands of people waiting to greet Governor Palin at these stops, and has talked about how much people love her...

...until today, that is.  Today's report featured Ms. Dimond complaining that Sarah Palin is staying away from the media, that she's not talking to them, blah blah blah.  (From there, she went right into saying that Gov. Palin had talked with Barbara Walters, and others, completely destroying her previous point.)

Gee, I don't know...why wouldn't Sarah Palin want to talk to Entertainment Tonight?  Surely it couldn't be because of stories like this one (a story teased multiple times by Ms. Dimond on yesterday's show), could it?

Note:  I have only been watching Entertainment Tonight this week because of Sarah Palin.  So there.

Not another one: is a format flip coming...to 102.3?

Rumors have appeared that Clear Channel may be about to pull the plug on 102.3 the River. 

The River, which debuted on KPEZ almost four years ago, started out as strictly contemporary Christian, but has added some family-friendly adult contemporary music in recent months/years.  (They were playing Sara Bareilles's "Love Song" over a year ago, I know.)  Mrs. Snowed was a big fan of the River, and I would listen to it occasionally when I wasn't listening to Bob or whatever.  102.3 had a much better signal than the three different much-lower-power stations serving the Austin area with the syndicated "K-Love", and because the River was a commercial station, it wasn't always asking you for donations like Candle 88.  (True story:  someone once related to me that Candle 88, in the midst of what seems to be an ongoing pledge drive, said that if listeners didn't pledge, they were grieving the Holy Spirit.  Yikes...)  So the loss of the River may be a sad development, at least for Mrs. Snowed and other contemporary Christian listeners.

Anyway, what I have heard so far (with no verification whatsoever, so take this for what it's worth) is that 102.3 will go all-Christmas on Thanksgiving Day, and once the holidays are over, so is the River.

I'm sure the loyal listeners of the River will not be thrilled to hear this, but keep in mind that these are just rumors...there were rumors circulating about 105.9 for years before that CC finally dumped its format, so this may turn out to be totally unsubstantiated.  We will see.

Entertainment Tonight Spotlights Palin-Hater

Sure, anyone who has watched Entertainment Tonight recently has seen that they have covered Sarah Palin's book tour.  (Also, anyone who has watched this show in years has my sympathy.  But that's another story entirely.)  Of course, every episode I have seen that showed the Going Rogue book tour (have I mentioned I get paid if you buy through this link?) just had to include clips of Levi Johnston, publicity hound and father of Gov. Palin's grandson.  (Hey, did you know he did a photo shoot for what's essentially a porno mag?  Who freaking cares?)

But their show tonight (19-Nov) appears, at least to me, to show where ET's political leanings lie.  Sure, they spent a couple of minutes highlighting the many, many people who waited to see her today, but they spent most of the show hyping an article about a "new book" that would supposedly shed some light on what Gov. Palin is really like.  The title: The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power.  (If for some strange reason you don't like Palin but frequent my blog--hi Dad--you can click that link to buy the book, and I'll get paid for that link too.)  As far as I'm concerned, spotlighting this book is not equal time (Levi got enough of that this week); this is simply a cheap shot at Sarah Palin during her moment in the sun.

Why do I think it's a cheap shot at her?  For starters, the book doesn't even come out until April.  Secondly--and ET didn't think this was worth mentioning--the author, Geoffrey Dunn, is a frequent contributor to the ultra-left Huffington Post.  This casts a bit of a shadow, at least in my mind, on the idea that this book could display anything resembling impartiality.  I see this book more as a smear job.

And why do I think it's a smear job?  Mr. Dunn has, in recent weeks, had an obsession rivaling that of self-described conservative Andrew Sullivan (no, still no link, Andi) with Sarah Palin.  He has already posted columns on HuffPo detailing so-called lies from Going Rogue that he managed to determine despite not having read the book.  And no, I'm not going to link to them, either.  Instead, I will direct you, dear reader, to Conservatives 4 Palin's takedown of Mr. Dunn on all counts.

So with this kind of track record, what has Mr. Dunn done to deserve a multi-minute spotlight from Entertainment Tonight?  Apparently, the only criteria for getting such attention is not liking Sarah Palin.  Such is the state of our media at present.

KGSR to 93.3; 107.1 to flip to Regional Mexican

Following up on Tuesday's entry:

Emmis Austin announced today that KGSR, currently at 107.1 FM, will move to 93.3, replacing the defunct Hot 93.3, effective tomorrow, 11/20, at 5pm.  This will make KGSR's format available to many more people, since 93.3 broadcasts at twice the power.

In order to help listeners make the transition, KGSR will broadcast on both the 93.3 and 107.1 frequencies for ten days.  Then, on Monday, 11/30, 107.1 will move to a Regional Mexican format, apparently in an attempt to fill the void left by BMP's blowup of multiple stations three weeks ago.

You can read the press release, and more information, at the Statesman's website.

Daily Kos diarist openly plans smear campaign against Palin

Via Conservatives 4 Palin:

Bob Johnson, diarist of no note at Daily Kos, plans to perpetrate an act of defamation/libel under the guise of "satire".  Meh.  Bob Johnson apparently wouldn't know satire if it hit him in the face.

Quoted in full, since, as he freely admits, he's going to try to destroy the evidence without being caught.  (As of now, this entry has already been erased, though C4P has screenshots.)  All emphasis his, including the word "fictional". 

Undercover subversive satire project: Please participate quickly!

by Bob Johnson

Share this on Twitter - Undercover subversive satire project: Please participate quickly!

Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25:51 PM PST

NOTE: This diary will self-destruct within the hour. Copy the dialogue box below the fold and post it across the Internet.

BarbinMD's current front pager on Palin's latest idiocy got me thinking about a little payback for Palin's part in promoting the "death panels" nonsense.
By linking to the Politico story on Palin's appearance on Limbaugh's radio show, highlighted in Barb's post with this graph:

Palin painted the race as part of "a clearer and clearer picture that what Americans are seeking – even in a district there in New York – they are seeking common sense conservative solutions to all the problems that we are facing."

... and suggesting the fictional copy block, below, contains the full Palin quote, we will be giving Palin a dose of her own medicine. Most people will read the quote and believe Palin really did say something that inane. And I would love for her to have to refute it the same way she had to refute Tina Fey's "front porch" quote.

PALIN: I think it (NY-23 race) made a clearer and clearer picture that what Americans are seeking – even in a district there in New York – they are seeking common sense conservative solutions to all the problems that we are facing.
LIMBAUGH: What kind of "common sense conservative solutions" are you talking about?
PALIN: You know, Rush, like all these contracts let out willy-nilly under the stimulus package to repave roads and the like that could have gone directly to hard-working Americans who would've been more than happy to pave their own roads like the streets in front of their homes themselves with stuff they could have bought from the Home Depot so we could have not only been repaving the roads but also stimulating our economy by having millions of hard-working Americans, regular Joe Six-Packs, buying paving stuff at Home Depot or their local hardware stores and the like.

Again, please note: Sarah Palin did not say this. This is a lie. This is defamation. This certainly is not satire, as its intent is to mislead.

Please do not let this falsehood become ingrained in culture the way the "I can see Russia from my house" quote (from Tina Fey) has.

Robert Stacy McCain writes so I don't have to

Fellow blogger (a much more well-known one than I am, of course) Robert Stacy McCain describes what he expects the media to do in covering the book tour of Sarah Palin (hey, did you know she has a book out, and did you know I get paid if you buy through this link?) in this American Spectator column.

Salient points, which Mr. McCain fleshes out quite a bit more than I will here:

1. They (the MSM, that is) will ignore Gov. Palin's popularity (even as people are lining up hours in advance for her book tour events).
2. They'll focus on the crazies.
3. They'll postulate that this means that the Republican Party is in trouble.

All this is par for the course for most of the media, I suppose, but we may as well call them out on it.

As an added bonus, Mr. McCain takes a well-deserved shot at self-described conservative (since no one else will still do it) Andrew Sullivan, best known these days as Trig-Truther #1.  Money quote:

We look forward to Andrew Sullivan's next book, Inside Sarah Palin's Uterus: The Most Shocking Scandal Ever.

It's worth a full read.  Check it out.

"Todd and Don Show" to return

590 KLBJ announced today that the "Todd and Don Show" will return to its lineup.  (Strangely, KLBJ previously had an article on their site announcing this change themselves, but now it's gone, so here's KXAN's article, and here's the Statesman article.)  The show, pulled in July over controversial racial remarks made by Don Pryor, will return to KLBJ's lineup on December 7.

Emmis, owner of KLBJ, issued the following press release:

Earlier today, Hispanic leaders and Emmis Austin Radio management met to discuss cultural sensitivity issues and a commitment to open communications and improved relationships. Emmis Austin Radio presented a plan of action which includes mandatory diversity training for all on-air personalities, producers, and station management, at all six Austin radio stations owned and operated by Emmis. Emmis announced that The Todd and Don Show will return to the KLBJ-AM airwaves on December 7, 2009, with a transformed perspective on community history, expectations and cultural sensitivity. Hispanic leaders were updated on Emmis Austin Radio’s progress in these areas so far, and were assured by Emmis that efforts to better serve the entire Austin community would be ongoing.

Hot 93.3 to flip?

All Access is reporting today that the entire Hot 93.3 air staff has been let go.  The station is currently still running CHR/Rhythmic without jocks, apparently.  No other information has been confirmed as of this date, but unsubstantiated reports are that the station is going to jettison its current format on Friday (I'm already getting hits to this blog entry from people checking into that possibility), possibly in favor of an FM Talk format...

...which makes little to no sense to me, given that we already have FM Talk available via 98.9 KXBT, and also (kinda) via translator K259AJ 99.7 (simulcasting 590 KLBJ).  It also makes little sense given KDHT's top-ten ratings in a tight Austin market.  But I guess we'll see.


(Thanks to tweep @Kent_Ahrens for the tip.)

Update 11/19:  It's not going to be FM Talk.  It's going to be KGSR.

Apparently the media doesn't like Sarah Palin...

(Hey, in case you haven't heard, Sarah Palin has a book coming out today.  There's a link over to the right of this screen.  I'll get a pittance if you buy through it.  If you like me, go for it.  If you don't like me, buy it anyway and have a book-burning or something.)

Just this morning, I've seen several items that appear to have been shown by some MSM outlets to counterbalance the phenomenal sales of Sarah Palin's book Going Rogue.  It's as though they feel that it is their personal mission to try to keep Gov. Palin down, in some sort of attempt to make President Obama look better.  Let's check out a few of them, shall we:

Last night, Naomi Wolf appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live"and, among other things, insisted that Sarah Palin was part of a "cabal" of people carrying water for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove.  Luckily, as NewsBusters reports, there were others to try to speak rationally about the former governor.  (If memory serves, local station KVUE had a Belo-circulated report that showed a different clip in which Ms. Wolf whined that all Governor Palin has been doing has been to "play the victim card", which only speaks to Ms. Wolf's opinion instead of saying anything about Gov. Palin, who, of course, has had a lot to say about policy and other things.  But that doesn't fit Ms. Wolf's skewed perception, does it?)

This morning, ABC's "Good Morning America" showed portions of Barbara Walters's interview with Sarah Palin (and since I haven't seen said interview yet, I'll reserve comment).  And what headline did they tout right along with the Palin interview?  Of course, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows that President Obama has an approval rating of 56%, which is miles away from the recent sub-50 ratings he's been pulling.  And there's a good reason for this:  as HotAir.com reports, this poll was skewed 14 points in favor of Democrats over Republicans.  Way to be fair, ABC.

Apparently CBS did not get an interview with Sarah Palin this time around, and I don't wonder why (see Couric, Katie), and so they felt that a good balance to the interview on ABC would be to give a spotlight to a completely undeserving Levi Johnston, father of Gov. Palin's grandson.  Others have fact-checked Mr. Johnston's changing story before now, and I can link to them later if need be, but suffice it to say that I generally don't believe pretty much anything Mr. Johnston is currently saying about Gov. Palin, and I further believe that he is on a mission, possibly guided by people with an agenda, to destroy the grandmother of his child in whatever way, truthful or not, he can.  (That, and I'm tired of seeing his smug face all over the media.  If ever there were a person deserving of my "useless celebrity" label, he is one.)

Meh, that's enough of that.  Besides, Robert Stacy McCain has already covered a lot of this evident bias against Sarah Palin in this American Spectator column.  Look into this, and judge for yourself.

Sarah Palin on Oprah: Comments

For the first time in a long time, I watched Oprah yesterday to see her interview with Sarah Palin.  I will admit I've watched Oprah before, unlike some others (the last time, I believe, was when Dave Ramsey was on).  I will also admit I haven't been too thrilled with Oprah since she openly endorsed Barack Obama for president, but that is her prerogative.  I think the "did Oprah snub Sarah" story was overblown (and so did Sarah, according to yesterday's interview), but given the hyperpartisan environment present in the 2000s, such a story was inevitable.

Enough with the preliminaries.  I'm sure there are another thousand people who want to speak their piece (yes, that was used correctly) about this interview, so let's get to it.

First of all, Sarah Palin gave a great interview with Oprah.  Yes, I'm a huge Palin fan, as anyone who reads this blog regularly (hi, Dad) knows, but I'll admit she's not always had good interviews before (see Couric, Katie).  This one was good.  Sarah was charming and personable, and she gave good answers to almost everything Oprah asked.  (No, she didn't answer Oprah's question about 2012.  I can totally understand why; would you want a three-year campaign?  It was bad enough watching Obama run for two years.)

Now, I know that some people slammed Oprah's interviewing in this episode, but I thought her questions were mostly quite fair.  She covered a majority of the topics that needed to be covered.  The only issue I had with her questions were that she re-asked Gov. Palin about her reasons for resigning immediately after she had just answered the question.  And, really, must we revisit that again?  Apparently some people simply refuse to accept the truth of the matter.

So, all in all, I'd say this interview was nicely handled by both Oprah and Sarah.  Of course, others will see things differently (for example:  if you must, you can see some rather nasty comments at Oprah's site's own write-up of the interview).  But with a few more interviews like this one, I totally believe that the real Sarah will triumph over the false characterization propagated by many with an agenda.

Video of almost the entire interview (while it lasts):

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3 (Couric interview clips omitted due to CBS copyright)



Part 4



Part 5



All this, of course, is to promote Gov. Palin's book, Going Rogue, easily available to you via the link on the right side of the page.  Note:  I do receive an incredibly small kickback commission for each copy sold via this link.

An exposition on a pejorative, and why what I learned doesn't matter

Earlier today I had a long and drawn out Twitter conversation with someone whose opinion, though I disagree with him a lot, I generally respect.  The crux of the conversation was whether the current trend among liberal columnists, politicians, and basically everyone else of using the term "teabaggers" to describe conservatives, or people who have taken part in tea parties, or both, or whatever, is a pejorative.  If one looks at the definition of "pejorative", one sees the following, courtesy dictionary.com:

–adjective
1. having a disparaging, derogatory, or belittling effect or force: the pejorative affix -ling in princeling.

By that definition, it can easily be seen that the way that "teabaggers" is used most often is a pejorative.  Some people--and for some reason a lot of them seem to be employed by the same network--are in love with the term.

Anyway, my online friend (we live in the same city, but we've never met) said that if the term originated with the tea partiers themselves, then it isn't a pejorative.  I challenged that point, and he pointed me to a Wikipedia article proving that there were protesters who fully knew the double meaning of "teabagging" and used it on their signs and webpages. 

Until today, I was unaware of anyone on what would be considered "my side" using that term that way.  I thought about it for a while (after I had to call off our debate for the day job), and I have come to the following conclusions:

1. It is not acceptable to me, as a father of young children, to be around a movement where it is necessary to use stupid double entendres to make a point.
2. Thus, had I known about what I learned today back then, I would have disavowed it.  Sigh...ignorance is bliss.
3. Yes, I would so have done.  You think I want to expose my children to that kind of language?
   
4. Most importantly, the fact that some very few people on my side used that term at one time does not make it open season on using it and still holding on to whatever shred of decorum is left in political discourse.

And my final conclusion about the whole thing:

Seriously, y'all using that term, grow up.  And that goes for you too, President Clinton.

Dishonorees #3, 4, 5 and 6

I continue to be somewhat surprised and disappointed at the number of people who run afoul of Snowed In's Theory.  The term to which my theory refers is a pejorative little term ("teabagger") used by people who apparently have little of value to say.  It's very frustrating to hear the term quite so often, and yet there are certain places--and networks--where it is commonplace.

And thus it is that two people from MSNBC, along with a guest, think that using pejoratives to define your political opposition is the funniest thing since David Letterman made a tasteless joke about a Palin daughter.

One such dishonoree--you knew this day would come quickly--is Keith Olbermann, who is so wonderfully objective that there is an entire website set up to him, and this website documents his recent (probably not the first, but the first I've seen documented since I wrote the theory) foray into the land of bad taste, a land with which Mr. Olbermann is quite familiar by now.

Also, as documented by Kathleen McKinley in a nice post here, Rachel Maddow and frequent guest Ana Marie "Don't Call Me Wonkette" Cox are frequent users of the offending term.  (There may be a silver lining to this portion of the story...see the end of this column for more.)  I could have documented Ms. Maddow's use of the pejorative term myself, except that I have seemingly blocked the short period of time during which I had MSNBC from my mind.  :)

Like I said, this is MSNBC about which we are talking, so the use of a term such as "teabagger" from its on-air personalities shouldn't surprise me.  But I expect more from our public officials (except my esteemed representative, Lloyd Doggett, from whom I expect little and yet still manage to be disappointed) than to disparage their political opponents in such a manner.  And thus I found myself a little shocked, I suppose, and very unhappy to hear that none other than President Obama has dishonored himself and his office with a quote such as "Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care?"  Lest anyone think this quote must have been made up, it was supplied to the NYTimes by a Dem representative, Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, as reported by the National Review Online.

So, in case there was any question regarding what President Obama really thinks of people with whom he doesn't agree, let's make it clear:  President Obama has no respect for you whatsoever.  If you want to disagree with this, disavow the slur above.  And don't come back at me with "well, your side has said blah blah blah..."  Yeah, so that gives our president an excuse to drop down to the level of some of his critics?  The president has the responsibility to be above that kind of thing.  The end.

Ugh.  Let's move on to a better portion of this sad story.  The above-mentioned Kathleen McKinley, aka @RWSparkle (well worth following, by the way, as she is better spoken than I, and she also blogs more regularly than I apparently will be this month) challenged Ms. Cox in the post cited above to stop her use of the term "teabaggers", as shown in the following Twitter exchange (snipped so as to hold on to what little shred of a G rating this blog still has):

RWSparkle @anamariecox I have a better idea. Why don't you stop using the crude term "teabaggers" in Tony Snow's memory?


annamariecox RT @RWSparkle: Why don't you stop using the crude term "teabaggers"? // if you donate to fight colorectal cancer, I'll never use it again.


RWSparkle Why don't u stop using the crude term"teabaggers"? //RT @anamariecox if you donate 2 fight colorectal cancer, I'll never use it again// U GOT IT!


RWSparkle EVERYONE NOTE! @anamariecox promised not to use "teabaggers" anymore if I contributed. I'm the TOP contributer http://tinyurl.com/ycneyyx


RWSparkle @anamariecox I'm taking you at your word. Tony Snow would approve. A good thing to do in his memory.

If you approve of this, you should consider donating as well.

Epilogue:  since I started writing this thing, I have seen confirmation that Ms. Cox has invoked the offending term once more.  Way to keep your promise.  (courtesy this tweet from RWSparkle)  People should still donate, but Ms. Cox needs to be called out for this.  This may end up as a new corollary:  once a dishonoree, always a dishonoree.  I certainly hope that doesn't hold up as true, but nothing I have seen so far from any dishonoree has changed my perception.  Such is life in the Age of Hope and Change, I suppose.