ABOUT THIS TIME YESTERDAY, MUCH OF THE MINNWISSIPPI REGION WHERE YOUR CORRESPONDENT RESIDETH was bracing for the possibility of another late-season snowstorm, as if Moeder Aard wanted to pull a fast one on an already record-breaking winter after much of the snow from Good Friday's storms was melting, and then some.

WELL------!!!

By about mid-afterlunch, the Weather Service cancelled the Winter Storm Watch previously issued after new forecast models indicated that the risk of heavier snow would be well to the south of us--as in Iowa and northern Illinois, not to mention areas of extreme southern Wisconsin close to the Illinois line.

In the final analysis, though, a sloppy mix could be falling on these parts by Sunday, with milder temperatures (never mind their being close to 50 degrees Fahrenheit) likely as April makes its appearence per the calendar.

Motherdear, for her part, hopes that the frost will leave the ground soon and conditions be calm enough for farmers and planters to get the first of the field work out of the way ahead of planting.

*************

WHEN GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED COOK'S TOURS GO WRONG, AND THEN SOME: A Chinese Government-sanctioned tour of Tibet for a select party of foreign journalists was met by a group of irate Tibetan Buddhist monks near beautiful downtown Lhasa, taunting the group with chants like "Don't believe your masters!" and "Tibet is not free!" admidst all manner of devastation and ruin brought about by the late rioting and disorder.

Said disorder still viewed by China as being the work of agents provocateur under orders from the Dalai Lama, which said Dalai Lama denies and shifts blame upon the Chinese. Which, come to think of it, amounts to projection on Beijing's part as it seeks to present a positive and glowing image for the sake of the Beijing Olympic Games later this summer.

=============

AND SPEAKING OF PROJECTION FOR "WINNING OF HEARTS AND MINDS," consider the following exchange (as transcribed by Media Matters for America) between Bill "No-Spin Zone" O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham on the former's Fox Prolefeed Channel show of the 25th, wherein Mr. O'Reilly equates "Secular-Progressive" sites and blogs with Fascism and questions their loyalty and (presumed) want of True Patriot Love in All Thy Sons Command:

O'REILLY: Oh, absolutely. It'll be interesting to see if Obama or his supporters do anything on this. And if they do, it'll be on the far-left blogs, which are really vile--just vile. And on that subject, you broke a story--or you're following a story--about the awful, despicable Media Matters outfit. What are they doing now?

LAURA INGRAHAM (Fox News contributor and conservative radio host): Well, this guy named Paul Waldman, who works for Media Matters, and I don't--I don't--I'm not familiar with his work--but he wrote a piece essentially saying that because conservatives and others are talking about Reverend Wright, they are, quote, "putting down a marker" to bring this--bring the campaign into one of the more ugly aspects of racial prejudice.

In other words, Bill, a guy who wants to be president of the United States, have the ability and the authority to launch nuclear weapons, start a war, veto spending bills, should not be vetted. We should not be able to look at his closest relationships that have followed a course of 23 years, especially when it comes to someone like Reverend Wright. If we do that, we are going to be branded racist. That's how scared they are about this Reverend Wright issue. They know it's explosive.

O'REILLY: Well, they're going to brand people racist anyway. That's what Media--

INGRAHAM: Absolutely.

O'REILLY: --Matters does. That's what they do. But here's the interesting part about this: That outfit has been very, very pro-Hillary Clinton up and to this point; very silent about any attacks on Barack Obama. This is the first time as far as I know--I don't read them all the time; they're just disgusting--but they've been basically in the tank for Hillary Clinton, because the Clintons and John Podesta, their close confidante, were in--and we don't know the extent of it--but did have something to do with the creation of Media Matters. There's very close ties there. But I think you're right. This is basically throwing out the first salvo that if Barack Obama is the nominee, any criticism--

INGRAHAM: Tread carefully.

O'REILLY: Right.

INGRAHAM: Yeah, tread carefully.

O'REILLY: --any criticism you make about him will--that's a racist criticism. Anything.

INGRAHAM: They're inoculating Barack Obama or attempting to do so. And Bill, I think this really shows the weakness of the Obama campaign right now. The fact that Media Matters and other groups like it have to be out there saying, "Hey, don't you do that. You're making this a race thing. And you're showing the country what you really think about black people," when, in fact, Bill, you know this as well as I do, this story about Reverend Wright isn't about race. It's about anti-Americanism.

O'REILLY: Oh, absolutely, absolutely.

INGRAHAM: It's about the vile anti-Americanism spewing forth from that pulpit week after week and a man like Barack Obama, who knows better, sitting there week after week because he thought he would get street credibility by being associated with that Trinity Church. Now he doesn't need them anymore, so it'll be interesting to see how he reacts in the days and weeks to come.

O'REILLY: But Barack Obama--and I don't believe this to be true, I could be wrong--he doesn't have anything to do with what Media Matters or the Daily Kos or any of these people do. And I want everybody to be clear about this. None of the candidates can control the kind of filth and--talk about anti-Americanism. I mean, these Media Matters--

INGRAHAM: Yeah, it's unbelievable. It's unbelievable.

O'REILLY: --Huffington Post, Daily Kos--I mean, these are fascists. They're dishonest people.

INGRAHAM: But, Bill, here's the deal.

O'REILLY: But the candidates--

INGRAHAM: Yeah. OK.

O'REILLY: --don't have anything to do with them other than currying, pandering to them.

(If you'd like to see the segment for yourself, here 'tis:)

1. A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. The philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. A fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

Its symbol was the fasces, a Roman symbol of magisterial authority and power in form of a battle axe surrounded by a bundle of bound rods, displayed in procession by such serving as attendants for magistrates.

And its articles of faith best considered as Producerist in nature, calling as they did for a "return to the land" excused by the notion that industry was already advanced enough in terms of development.

With that in mind, may I be so kind as to ask Mr. O'Reilly to please "show us your facts" equating Secular-Progressive weblogs and news portals with Fascism, in view of the above definition. Until then, such remarks should be treated as McCarthyism most rank and vile.

*************

MEANWHILE, IN THE NEW CAPITAL OF THE SO-CALLED "UNION OF MYANMAR," BY NAME NAY PYI TAW, military majordomo Gen. Than Shwe used the annual Armed Forces Day holiday to, on the one hand, reiterate his past categorical pledge to restore civilan rule in 2010 ... yet, on the other such, called upon the Myanmari people and nation to fight "destructive elements trying to sabotage the stability of the state" (Gen. Shwe's words) preparatory therefor.

And speaking of "destructive elements trying to sabotage the stability of the state:" Doesn't that sound like the sort of language which the conservative prolefeed masheen likes to use in describing real or suspected "secular-progressive" and "liberal" elements to further reinforce their delusion that only conservatives are entitled "as of right" to an exclusive, Government-Protected Monopoly on prolefeed?