South Park Conservatives

Southpark There’s a new term you’re probably going to be hearing a lot of (if you haven’t been already): South Park conservatives.

The idea of South Park conservatives is that they’re, well, conservatives who like the vulgar cartoon show South Park, which skewers politically correct nonsense on a regular basis.

The reason you’ll be hearing a lot of the term is that some folks have been arguing that there are an awful lot of South Park conservatives, and since they’re younger (on average) that most voters, they represent the wave of the future.

HEREZA STORY FROM TECH CENTRAL ON SOUTH PARK CONSERVATIVES (CHT: Southern Appeal.)

The saga of South Park conservatives is also the focus of a new book by author Brian C. Anderson. He writes about them in

THIS BOOK ADVERTISEMENT THINLY DISGUISED AS NEWS ANALYSIS.

EXCERPTS:

For decades, with few exceptions, a liberal sensibility dominated American humor. From Lenny Bruce to Norman Lear’s "All in the Family" to today’s "Will & Grace," the laughs came at the expense of fuddy-duddy conservatives and bourgeois conventions.

But new media have allowed a new kind of cutting-edge humor to emerge, one whose primary target is the Left.

The anarchic, vulgar archetype of this anti-liberal spirit, which gives my book its title, is Comedy Central’s brilliant, and wildly popular, cartoon series "South Park," depicting the adventures of four foulmouthed fourth-graders.

"South Park" sometimes shows a socially conservative streak — one episode actually mocks pro-choice extremism, when Cartman’s mother, Liane, decides to abort her son — then in the third grade.

She goes to the "Unplanned Parenthood" clinic. "I want to have an abortion," she tells the receptionist.

"If you don’t feel fit to raise a child, then abortion probably is the answer," the receptionist tells her. "Do you know the actual time of conception?"

Liane: "About—eight years ago."

"I see," the receptionist says, "so the fetus is?"

Eight years old, Liane says, matter-of-factly.

"Ms. Cartman, uh eight years old is a little late to be considering abortion," says the receptionist.

Liane registers surprise, and the receptionist elaborates: "Yes — this is what we would refer to as the ‘fortieth trimester.’ "

"But I just don’t think I’m a fit mother," Liane laments.

"Wuh? But we prefer to abort babies a little earlier on," the receptionist notes. "In fact, there’s a law against abortions after the second trimester."

Later, Liane discovers, to her horror, that the word "abortion" means termination of life — and not the same thing as "adoption," as she had mistakenly thought — she abandons her plans.

GET THE STORY.

Performance Art

More and more, these days, the question of whether art-imitates-life or life-imitates-art is becoming another chicken-and-egg question. Take, for example, this case of, uh, performance art:

"A Berlin couple plan to have their first baby at an art gallery, the gallery owner said on Saturday, confirming a newspaper report.

"’It’s a gift to humanity, a once in a lifetime thing,’ Bild newspaper quoted Winfried Witt, partner of mother-to-be Ramune Gele, as saying.

[…]

"About 30 people are expected to attend the birth, scheduled for April 24. They would be told to come to the gallery as soon as the 27-year-old Gele’s contractions became regular, Witt was quoted as saying."

Although the "performance" will be taking place in an art gallery, apparently this will not be an open exhibit:

"[Gallery manager Johann] Novak said the gallery, which usually shows installations and video art, would be closed during the birth. ‘The private aspect will be maintained,’ he said."

Uh huh. That’s why all the details are being released to the media. So we can maintain privacy. At least the article reports that not everyone is finding the proposed masterpiece fitting for a gallery exhibition:

"Another gallery owner in the street said: ‘I find it mad.’"

GET THE STORY.

The Changing American Catholic Voter

The role of Catholics in American politics has undergone significant changes in the last hundred years. Catholics were able to make sufficient inroads that they could get a presidential candidate (Al Smith) nominated in 1928 and then enabling him to lose despite voting for him in large numbers, followed by being able to get a presidential candidate (John Kennedy) nominated in 1960 and then enabling him to win by voting for him in large numbers, followed by having a third presidential candidate (John Kerry) nominated in 2004 and enabling him to lose by voting for his opponent in large numbers.

The latter is explained by the ongoing decoupling of the American Catholic population from the Democratic Party and a change in its voting habits and priorities.

HOW MIGHT A NEW POPE INFLUENCE THAT?

EXCERPT:

George W. Bush was the first sitting president to attend a papal funeral. President Carter sent his mother to Pope John Paul I’s 1978 funeral. Such symbolic change speaks volumes about the evolution in Catholic America’s voting habits over the past quarter-century and about Pope John Paul II’s role in that conversion.

GET THE STORY.

eBay Sacrilege Update

This is a limited-time only post that I’ll take down soon since I don’t want to give malefactors ideas, but . . .

Several folks have e-mailed stories noting that the gentleman responsible for the recent sacrilege on eBay had a change of heart and the matter has been resolved more satisfactorily than was previously the case.

Unfortunately, eBay itself has not yet had a change of heart regarding allowing such matters.

GET THE STORY (W/CONTACT INFO FOR EBAY).

Hacking The Conclave

Several readers have e-mailed links to

THIS PIECE BY SECURITY EXPERT BRUCE SCHNEIER ON THE POSSIBILITIES FOR HACKING THE PAPAL ELECTION.

His conclusion: The Church has a good system in place that will be extraordinarily difficult to hack.

EXCERPTS:

What are the lessons here? First, open systems conducted within a known group make voting fraud much harder. Every step of the election process is observed by everyone, and everyone knows everyone, which makes it harder for someone to get away with anything.

Second, small and simple elections are easier to secure. This kind of process works to elect a Pope or a club president, but quickly becomes unwieldy for a large-scale election. The only way manual systems work is through a pyramid-like scheme, with small groups reporting their manually obtained results up the chain to more central tabulating authorities.

And a third and final lesson: when an election process is left to develop over the course of a couple thousand years, you end up with something surprisingly good.

GET THE STORY.

The Other Oath

Recently I quoted from Universi Dominici Gregis–the apostolic consitution of John Paul II governing the conclave and other matters to be taken care of upon his death–and gave the oath that is taken by those involved in the conclave who are not cardinal electors (e.g., support personnel). The cardinal electors take a different oath. Here it is:

53. In conformity with the provisions of No. 52, the Cardinal Dean or the Cardinal who has precedence by order and seniority, will read aloud the following formula of the oath:

We, the Cardinal electors present in this election of the Supreme Pontiff promise, pledge and swear, as individuals and as a group, to observe faithfully and scrupulously the prescriptions contained in the Apostolic Constitution of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, Universi Dominici Gregis, published on 22 February 1996. We likewise promise, pledge and swear that whichever of us by divine disposition is elected Roman Pontiff will commit himself faithfully to carrying out the munus Petrinum of Pastor of the Universal Church and will not fail to affirm and defend strenuously the spiritual and temporal rights and the liberty of the Holy See. In a particular way, we promise and swear to observe with the greatest fidelity and with all persons, clerical or lay, secrecy regarding everything that in any way relates to the election of the Roman Pontiff and regarding what occurs in the place of the election, directly or indirectly related to the results of the voting; we promise and swear not to break this secret in any way, either during or after the election of the new Pontiff, unless explicit authorization is granted by the same Pontiff; and never to lend support or favour to any interference, opposition or any other form of intervention, whereby secular authorities of whatever order and degree or any group of people or individuals might wish to intervene in the election of the Roman Pontiff.

Each of the Cardinal electors, according to the order of precedence, will then take the oath according to the following formula:

And I, N. Cardinal N., do so promise, pledge and swear. Placing his hand on the Gospels, he will add: So help me God and these Holy Gospels which I touch with my hand.

Also,

HERE’S A HANDY LINK TO UNIVERSI DOMINICI GREGIS IN CASE YOU WANT TO LOOK ANYTHING UP DURING THE CONCLAVE.