Did you see the announcement by the Florida Marlins this week, that they played a “carbon-neutral” game of baseball?

By the Marlins’ calculations, more than 440 metric tons of carbon dioxide would be emitted during the game, from people traveling to the ballpark, stadium operations and other means. The Marlins, the state and the nonprofit group carbonfund.org said the carbon footprint of the game would be offset through investments in reforestation projects across the Southeast.

That’s right, sports fans. You have endangered the planet with your incessant patronage of baseball.

But you can make good with the environmental alarmist Florida Marlins organization by never visiting their ballpark ever again. And just for good measure, it’s probably best to avoid the Marlins entirely — buy no merchandise, collect no memorabilia and watch no games on television, as any of these activities may release dangerous levels of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

The planet may be in imminent danger until we completely boycott the Florida Marlins.

Anybody have an extra “End” key for the iBook G4 handy?

I could use a spare; one of the puppies snatched mine and chewed it up.

On the bright side, I have a ready-made excuse for being late on my next writing assignment: the dog ate it.

My sophomore post at Newsbusters highlights the NY Times’s contentious decision to expose the CIA interrogator responsible for getting information out of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Most interesting are the comments the post is generating (22 and counting), especially one by sean robins examining how the Times defends its double standard with an “incredible sleight of hand,” distinguishing between a story’s “subjects” (named, over the CIA’s objection) and its “sources” (some of the agent’s colleagues, who remain unnamed).

Similarly, Founding_Father wonders “exactly how many times in the last 8 years [the Times] has used ‘anonymous’ sources, or withheld names” from other articles:

[W]hat were the circumstances surrounding it. Were they all intelligence officers or sexual assault victims? How many times do they use “washington insider” instead of using the names?

The Times editors claim that publishing the agent’s name “was necessary for the credibility and completeness of the article,” but they failed to do what was necessary for the safety and security of this nation and its public servants. Furthermore, by doing so, over the objection of the CIA and the agent’s legal counsel, the Times has dealt yet another critical blow to its own credibility as an organization, especially in light of its Valerie Plame hysteria.

Elsewhere: Gateway Pundit, Hot Air…

We should all be fully aware that the latest political ad from BRCK BM was specifically intended to inspire the following free-attention-getting comparison:

It was a stupid idea the first time around.

UPDATE: Looks like that isn’t the only stupid thing in the ad; BRCK BM also takes credit for legislation he didn’t vote for.

At the risk of upsetting the delicate puppy-to-politics ratio, here are a couple good shots my in-laws took in Nashville this weekend.

Did I say Nashville? I meant Dagobah.

Here’s Eden practicing one of her Jedi mind tricks (you get more treats that way).

Since the puppies aren’t frequently peeing on the floor anymore, the little make-shift fence we built to keep them off the carpet has largely fallen out of use and was moved against the wall, out of the way. This morning, Eden jumped behind it and then decided she was trapped. She started whining and begging me to help her out, but I decided to leave her for a minute and see if she could figure it out. She didn’t; I eventually came to her rescue.

The sharp folks over at NewsBusters.org have welcomed me as a contributor, picking up my recent post on the Daily Show. I’m thrilled to be joining such a remarkable group of professionals and look forward to writing more media criticism in the near future.

At this year’s Media Reform Conference, Bill Moyers was invited to open his hole again. Since he’s still showing his face in public, I can only assume Moyers never got around to reading my exhaustive four-part rebuttal to his speech in Memphis last year. Freepress expects to have this year’s transcript available early next week; I think I’ll hold off for that rather than suffer through the 40 minute video multiple times. It humors me that they posted a segment from Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC show at the top of the “conference videos” page. Not to mention the fact that, you know, the whole point of the conference is patently absurd… that’s a little funny, too.

Each year, I strive to offer a certain number of blog posts purely as a public service; this is one of those posts. Below are just a few of the things I have learned as a conservative blogger, and I’d like to share them with you, so that won’t make these mistakes:

You are not allowed to criticize Jon Stewart, because his show is classified as “fake news.” It’s perfectly fine to lie, misrepresent and distort if you’re a “comedian.” Stewart never claimed to be a credible journalist, so his political commentary cannot be expected to adhere to any measure of honesty or responsibility. So long as there’s the expectation of a punchline at the end of his monologue, he is free to invent facts, strip quotes from their context, make totally slanderous statements and distort the news items under discussion.

You are not allowed to criticize the Memphis Flyer, because that organization has never considered itself an objective, straight news source. It’s perfectly fine to lie, misrepresent and distort if you’re a “decidedly liberal” alternative newsweekly. So long as every word printed or posted serves the Leftist agenda, its authors are free to invent facts, strip quotes from their context, make totally slanderous statements and distort the news items under discussion.

You are not allowed to criticize socialist Christians who declare themselves “non-partisan.” Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo and other Christian leaders of the radical Left have not officially accepted the Democratic label and accordingly should be considered forever above the fray of partisan politics, no matter how consistently they adopt and circulate Democratic rhetoric.

You are not allowed to criticize global warming alarmism, unless you happen to be a meteorologist, climatologist, atmospheric chemist or geophysicist. If you are a scientist with a degree in one of these fields, you are still not allowed to criticize global warming alarmism because it is already a settled consensus. You are also not allowed to criticize global warming alarmists who have no degree in science, whether or not you have more expertise and/or credibility in the field than they do.

You are not allowed to criticize Darwinism, unless you happen to be a biologist, chemist, physiologist, paleontologist or zoologist. If you are a scientist with a degree in one of these fields, you are still not allowed to criticize Darwinism because to do so would somehow violate the separation of church and state, or would in any case reveal you to be an authoritarian Christian fascist.

You are not allowed to criticize anti-war, anti-American radicalism unless you have served in the military. If you have served in the military, you are still not allowed to criticize anti-war radicalism because you are a war-monger whose character has been thoroughly compromised by the Bush administration propaganda machine and whose hands are forever bloodstained by the illegal war in Iraq.

You are not allowed to criticize Leftist political figures who publicly stump for political causes or candidates if they can conceivably be classified as “victims” or if they happen to be married to the candidate. You are also not allowed to mention that candidate’s middle name or display photos that reveal the candidate in a less than heroic light.

You are not allowed to criticize any Leftist with an advanced degree and a funny hat, particularly if you currently live, or have ever lived, in a suburban area that is primarily inhabited by one demographic group, maintains traffic cameras at certain busy intersections and hosts an annual horse show. It goes without saying that this holds true regardless of your own educational level, your particular socioeconomic status or your feelings on horses and traffic cameras.

You folks have an insatiable appetite for photos of the puppies, so here’s another round:

This was Freckles mere moments before she was eaten by a wolf.

We had her stuffed.

Eden took the loss pretty well.

Just kidding, Freckles is ok. It’s just that playing is really hard work.

Eden and Freckles work harder than most.