« March 2006 | Main | May 2006 »
April 28, 2006
As if we needed one more reason to avoid ever, ever watching "The View"
Amateur Haikuist and protest-marrier Rosie O'Donnell will be taking over as co-host of "The View". She replaces Meredith Vieira, who replaced Katie Couric on the Today Show, who replaced Dan Rather at CBS.
Not to be punny in this Rosie O'Donnell-related post, but this raises an ugly possibility: that Rosie's not far from becoming the face of the CBS Evening News. CBS isn't the pillar of truth it claims to be but this isn't a happy feeling: sort of like when Tip O'Neill was Speaker of the House.
Posted by bill at 10:19 AM | Comments (2)
April 27, 2006
File under: "Unsurprising"
Somehow it's not surprising that the US military is having difficulty recruiting Arab-Americans, as Reuters almost gleefully reports.
Reuters doesn't mention that Muslims are a tiny minority of the US population (3.5 million as of the 2000). But Reuters does blame US policy: "Many Arab-Americans also have felt singled out for heightened scrutiny by U.S. law enforcement and other authorities after the 2001 attacks, and may feel reluctant to work for a government they feel has discriminated against them. "A lot of policies seemed to focus on Arab-Americans after 9/11 so people asked: 'Why should I be part of an entity that is inflicting injustices or a selective approach on my own community?"' said Imad Hamad, head of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee's Dearborn office.
That is, Reuters buys into the mendacious lie that Muslim antipathy for the US is a product of the Bush administration. Let's face facts: Many Muslims in America may not feel any loyalty to the US - especially the engrained love of country required to join the military. A disproportionate share hope and pray for more 9/11-style attacks on the US; they cheered when the towers fell; they believe in "moral equivalency." Are we supposed to believe all of these dots are isolated, and inconsequential? Many Arab-Americans are Muslim first, Arabs second, and pretend to care about America when they need to.
Don't believe me? Ask around.
(H/T: Gadsden Flag, who adds: "Why were some Arab-Americans dancing in the streets with glee on Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn on 9/11? It couldn't be because they "felt singled out for heightened scrutiny by U.S. law enforcement and other authorities after the 2001 attacks.'")
UPDATE (4/28): The above post was posted at RedState and I was accused of posting something "racist," and banned from the site. Take a look at the comments and the Mods' reaction - evidently, even among "conservatives" we must abide speech regulations. I only wish the comments could've been posted here, where speech is virtually unregulated.
MORE: Pamela at Atlas Shrugs voices her support.
Posted by bill at 04:26 PM | Comments (0)
April 26, 2006
Criminals shooting 2 year-old kids don't kill 2 year-old kids. Gun rights supporters kill 2 year-old kids.
So says the Republican mayor of New York City, Mike Bloomberg. A two year-old boy named David Pacheco Jr. was killed Easter Sunday when thugs in the Bronx exchanged "hard looks" then "trashtalking and slaps," then accidentally shot David. On a far-off mental holiday Bloomberg responded yesterday by blaming politicians "who vote against getting guns off the street":
The only thing that would have helped that child is if we had the courage to stand up and get the guns off the street. And those who vote against getting guns off the street really are the ones as much responsible as the shooter, because if the shooter didn't have a gun, that child would still be alive.
CJ Blogger Gadsden Flag notes, "They never want to address why these tragic shootings most often take place in places like NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, etc. which have the strictest gun control laws, and not in places like Vermont, New Hampshire, Wyoming, Kentucky, etc. with so-called "easy availability" of guns. There's obviously no correlation between availability and criminal use (except for possibly an inverse correlation), but if they couldn't blame the guns, they'd have to start looking at the people."
Posted by bill at 04:05 PM | Comments (0)
Snow Day: A roundup of reax
Tony Snow is the new White House Press Secretary. I think it's a shrewd move. If Snow is pugnacious, even ornery with the press, so be it. Around the horn:
Suitably Flip notes that, "given his strongly-entrenched Fox identity amassed over the entire decade of the channel's existence, I suspect the carping about overt and manifest ties between the GOP/the Bush administration and the Fox News Channel is about to reach an unholy volume." True, true - apoplexy can't be far off. Has anyone reached Chris Matthews?
Powerline: "His congeniality and media background will buy him some popularity with the reporters who cover the White House. But essentially all of them are partisan Democrats, so that good will will last for about a week. What the White House really needs is someone who can push back aggressively against the liberal tilt of the media, and make the administration's case directly to the people. Tony Snow is equipped to do this, I think; the question is, will he?"
MD Patriot at Kos: "Tony Snow...This one is a professional Bushite scum liar, already proved himself, he'll lie every day for his hero" and "Snow is a fool and liar now, he just changed paymasters. Or did he? Lets investigate to see if Fox might just be keeping Tony boy on their payroll."
Democratic Underground actually offers some insight for a change - a list of his statement's critical of the Bush Administration. Captain Ed notes, "I doubt Tony would have given up his lucrative positions at Fox and in syndication in order to represent policies in which he did not believe. His hiring may not have explicit policy implications, but it hints at some possible shifts."
Wonkette points out Snow is in a band wants to hear Snow's rendition of the Spongebob Squarepants theme song.
Posted by bill at 11:48 AM | Comments (0)
April 25, 2006
Fodder for you, fodder for me
The perfect cure for Tuesday ennui:
The Hubble turns 16 and NASA releases this:
The often-fair Newsweek looks at what happened in Durham NC.
Michelle Malkin's launching Hot Air - and by that I mean a new website called, "Hot Air."
Barf alert: The left yearns for the French model for a happy and good society, and despise the U.S. It's hard to ignore this evidence, aye?
Richard Cohen says it's not anti-Semetic to say that "Israel's American supporters have immense influence over U.S. foreign policy." Atlas Shrugs says it is anti-Semetic for a University to ban an anti-Palestine art display.
Roger Toussaint, the serpentine head of the NYC transit union, went to jail last night. Via Suitably Flip, GOP and the City ghostwrites Toussaint's jail diary.
Posted by bill at 02:54 PM | Comments (2)
Ken O'Brien lives
As the 2006 NFL Draft approaches, New York Jets fans are reminded they have nothing to fear but being a Jets fan.
Posted by bill at 01:08 PM | Comments (0)
Our metrosexual former president
A unpresidential presidential portrait says a thousand words (starting with "effeminate"):
Posted by bill at 10:29 AM | Comments (2)
April 22, 2006
Kerry '08 warms up another lame pitch
John Kerry, in a speech aimed at the Howard Dean wing of his party, today gave anti-war nuts a great big pat on the back, reminding a Boston crowd that "dissent," especially when it comes to the "wrong war at the wrong place" run by the Republican war machine etc., is patriotic. The Wash Post reports Kerry it's all part of Kerry's plan for a 2008 run: "In a series of speeches, guest columns and television appearances, Kerry has sought to right what many Democrats regard as the defects of that race by outlining a clear exit strategy for Iraq and vowing to fight back against GOP attacks on his and other Democrats' patriotism. Kerry's aggressive attitude is also aimed at wooing liberal voters for a potential presidential bid in 2008."
Huh? I'm not sure this adds up. First, the reason Kerry lost the election was not any lack of support among Dean supporters on Election Day. In fact, Kerry's move to the left on Iraq, in order to defeat Dean in the primaries, actually allowed President Bush to portray Kerry as an anti-war radical. Second, Kerry looks almost pathetic, almost Al Gore-like, trying to run a "shadow" presidency. It's the mark of a true loser to be unable to confront defeat, and Kerry won't benefit from it any more than that Gore has. No one wants to hear John Kerry's "exit strategy," and he looks especially lame offering one based on the hypothetical, "If I were president."
Note to Mr. Kerry: It's o-ver.
Posted by bill at 08:39 PM | Comments (0)
April 20, 2006
Blame Bush update
Hillary's celebrating Earth Day by blaming President Bush for every problem on earth:
Earth Day this Saturday offers us a moment to think about our environment and of the world around us - the air we breathe, the water we drink, the great natural treasures that we have inherited. I hope we will think of it as a day to rededicate ourselves to protecting our planet: our home for our children and their children.
(More below)
Because the threats to our environment and way of life are real and growing.
In the last five years, the Bush administration has left no major environmental law untouched in their push to deregulate, undermining or rolling back decades of regulations put in place to protect our heath. The results are all around us: more greenhouse gases, global warming, rising seas, more violent storms like Katrina. The endless demand for higher-priced oil is depleting world supplies, weakening our economic security, and worsening global warming.
We urgently need a national energy strategy that confronts these challenges head on. We certainly need more than one line in the State of the Union address.
We can kick our oil addiction and slow global climate change while making our economy more globally competitive and generating well paying jobs. We can develop renewable energy and energy efficiencies, protecting our wilderness from drilling and our shores from oil spills. We can create alternative energy industries, which will mean cleaner streams, healthier air, and fewer greenhouse gases.
We have the National Institutes of Health; why don't we have a National Institute of Energy?
Let oil companies be part of the solution by investing some of their historic profits, due partly to subsidies, into a strategic energy fund to develop alternative energy forms.
The strategic fund would spur the development and deployment of new energy technologies. We could increase consumer tax breaks to buy fuel-efficient vehicles, extend incentives to produce electricity from renewable sources, and make bio fuels more widely available.
We also need to develop an aggressive energy research program and a portfolio of cutting edge technologies to create new forms of marketable energy and energy conservation.
And if we take this seriously right now, we can see results in the near future, because so much of the technology -- like wind farms, solar energy cells, ethanol, and biodiesel -- already is on the brink of being commercially feasible.
What we need now is a commitment to our national and global environment and the practical energy strategy that will back up that commitment.
Our country needs more than a short-sighted, oil company-dependent energy policy that values drilling anywhere for oil more than it values protecting our planet.
We Americans have always thrived on challenges. It's in our blood. So let's challenge ourselves on this Earth Day. If we have confidence in our can-do tradition, we'll be ready to find new answers to our environmental and energy problems and build a healthier, safer future for our children.
Sincerely,
Lifelong Yankee Fan[Ed. Note: Her email doesn't really say this.]
Posted by bill at 01:48 PM | Comments (2)
Iran: nothing to fear but an oversupply of caviar and rugs
Earlier this week, Amir Taheri predicted that in the face of the IAEA's April 28th deadline for Iran to halt uranium enrichment, Iran might offer "confidence building measures" in the form of a temporary suspension of the enrichment process. Iran, Taheri said, wants to "play[] the diplomatic game for another two years until Bush becomes a "lame-duck", unable to take military action against the mullahs." This is Iran's vision for undermining support, in the US and around the world, for a military strike on Iran, while the Mullahs go their merry way, visions of Sharia-endorsed nukes dancing in their heads, developing a nuclear arsenal and then enhancing it.
Taheri's prediction makes plenty of sense, but one wonders why Tehran would feel any need to be so careful. Today Iran thumbed its nose at the IAEA, giving plenty more reason to doubt whether Tehran will bother even to play the diplomatic game. With just over a week left until Iran must pretend to comply, I get the sense Iran may not need any diplomatic games. After all, there is no support to undermine - the American left and the "international community" (even the UK) have decided the military option is not an acceptable one.
If you're Iran, why bother with deceptive diplomacy? Fear of being overrun by rugs and caviar? The rhetoric coming from Iran is that of a country that sees the US hamstrung, and foresees nothing to of concern.
Posted by bill at 09:34 AM | Comments (0)
April 19, 2006
Regulated market watch: Verizon given more insulation from competition
"Competition" only the government could love: More competition means higher prices? The Buffalo News reports:
State regulators Tuesday adopted new rules that loosen the regulations on telephone companies and allows them to raise prices in the face of rising competition from cable providers, cell phones and the Internet....Verizon Communications, which had been pushing for a broad deregulation of the state's phone markets, said the new policy doesn't go far enough toward allowing it to compete effectively with cell phone providers, Internet-based phone services and cable TV companies....A PSC staff report last fall noted that Verizon has lost nearly 3 million access lines, or 25 percent of its customer base in New York, over the last five years as consumers have switched to other phone service providers.
Posted by bill at 03:11 PM | Comments (0)
What really matters?
I don't pretend to be an economist, but I do pretend to be someone who's read a lot of charts, and I thought the one below was pretty striking - showing a strong correlation between gas prices and the President's job approval:
(H/T: Rush Limbaugh.)
Of course, this doesn't bode well for the President as we head into summer driving and oil zooms past $70/barrel. UPDATE: And btw when I say "correlation" I mean, of course, the "inverse" kind.
Posted by bill at 01:48 PM | Comments (0)
April 18, 2006
"The Fall of France and the Multicultural World War"
At Gates of Vienna: France, headed for its abyss. Read the whole thing.
Posted by bill at 12:39 PM | Comments (0)
April 17, 2006
Criminal justice for the jihadinsane: make way for the waahmbulance
Zacarias Moussaoui is treating himself to all of the luxuries of the American criminal justice system, this despite always being eager to taunt us for the sorts of values that provide those luxuries to him. (Wasn't it just a few weeks ago, after being declared "eligible" for the death penalty (did we need a trial?) that he vowed, "You'll never get my blood, God curse you all!"?) But this jihadist had trouble at home, you see, and so for reasons that make little sense, we now have to endure the the sad story of Moussaoui's childhood, and what led him astray, etc. etc. All that "infidel blood" talk is really just a product of Moussaoui's hurt feelings, you know, as a child.
From the Bloomberg report, Moussaoui's childhood might've been less awful than something you'd see on Trading Spouses, but when the jihad rubber meets the lethal injection road, I suppose it's time for Zack to swap the jihad for some old fashioned American victimhood, aye? Three cheers for defense lawyers!
Barf. As I've written before, this trial makes no sense -- but there's always Option II Set him on fire and throw him off a tall building.
Posted by bill at 02:59 PM | Comments (0)
April 16, 2006
A sobering reminder: what Iran is up to, and why
Keep this in the "favorites" for the next few months. I hope Teheri is wrong, but he spells out a simple, direct path backed by credible assertions -- let's see if his short-term predictions about Iran's "confidence building" come true. If they do, we'll see the White House will be under intense pressure to back off, and Taheri will have been right again...
Posted by bill at 10:39 PM | Comments (0)
April 13, 2006
John Bolton: Media blackout?
One would think that given the last few days' developments in Iran, an appearance by UN Ambassador John Bolton on the timely subjects of UN Reform and Iranian nukes would garner some MSM attention, especially when that appearance is in the MSM beast's belly, midtown Manhattan. Bolton's newsworthy, right? (See here, here and here.)
Wrong!
Last night Mr. Bolton spoke before the New York Lawyer's Chapter of the Federalist Society on precisely those two subjects, opening with some details of his perspectives and efforts at reforming the UN. And yet I may be the only one who took notes. Owing to MSM's disinterest, here's a recap:
While most member nations wallow in inertia and revel in the status quo, Bolton believes the US shouldn't simply accept the unfair financial burden, the inefficiency, and the sick anti-American culture at Turtle Bay. He candidly made the case that if that if the UN is unable to confront challenges and meet its stated goals, it is incumbent upon the US first to effect change within the UN, and if that doesn't work, to pursue alternatives. The Ambassador is knee-deep in sensible financial and performance reform, the kind being resisted by UN fatcats who see the UN as a convenient restraint on US power that's being funded, wouldn't you know, primarily (and at an absurdly unfair rate) by the US. The US is, for example, a UN piggy bank, funding about a 1/4 of general expenses and nearly 1/3 of the "peacekeeping" bills. Funding shares of other nations drop off precipitously from there; the top 10 or so countries fund about 90% of these costs, and the UN scheme provides for one-country, one-vote. That, Bolton argues, is not in the US interest. Bolton noted insightfully that every member nation is expected to advocate on its own behalf at the UN with one exception. The United States alone is chastised for daring to act on its own interests, despite being the UN's cash cow, Secretariat host, and international engine of democracy.
Turning to Iran, the Ambassador noted the US' substantial diplomatic victory in convincing China and Russia to bring the Mullahs before the Security Council and went on to explain what to expect in the coming months, now that Iran has demonstrated "mastery" across the spectrum of nuclear development: (a few) more deadlines will be set then ignored by Iran, and we'll know "within a few months" whether the UN will have passed its "greatest test" in some years. Bolton clearly does not foresee an agonizing, drawn out diplomatic process but rather a simple, fair one that should be backed by resolve, not capitulations. The Ambassador drew some laughs rolling his eyes at the "stop or I'll say stop again" (paraphrasing) diplomatic process, and a few pokes at the absurdity of it all, although he was careful to emphasize the Security Council can have an important role, at least theoretically.
Bolton accepted a few questions and came across as exceptionally bright, straight talking and something of the non-diplomat Democrats hated, at least in the sense that he views challenges from the perspective that (gasp!) America must put American interests first. That is his prism: we are Americans, and we are allowed to be pro-American, even in the UN. To Bolton, both UN reform and questions on Iran present issues that are clear, often exceptionally so.
Bolton speaks with a clarity that is anathema to the Turtle Bay set, and to our friends at the NY Times, who incidentally have devoted a dozen or so reporters to a NY Post gossip columnist scandal but didn't feel compelled to cover the Ambassador's appearance. That's too bad, because few people have such relevant, timely insight on such important issues.
Posted by bill at 12:44 PM | Comments (1)
April 12, 2006
The thing about Derek Jeter
I think there's a case to be made, and I've made some baseball enemies trying to make it, that if Derek Jeter played in Kansas City, or Pittsburgh, etc. he'd be above-average, but only that. Stats only: he's a consistent .300+ hitter, scores lots of runs, steals some bases and is an above-average shortstop; nothing remarkable about his HR and RBI numbers -- not the stuff of superstars. Put him in a small market in a lesser lineup, the argument goes, and he's good but clearly not "great."
The thing about Derek Jeter, though, is that he seizes his moments. He always has, starting in his rookie year, 1996. I've watched Jeter for 10 years now and it's almost impossible to explain to anyone who hasn't what is so remarkable about the guy. It's beyond the cliche "intangibles" -- he's just plain clutch. Not to make too much of an April 11th game, but yesterday Jeter did it again. He isn't a home run hitter, but once again he hit one in a huge spot. That's what he does.
A Rod seems like a nice guy, and once he was a Yankee he said all the right things about Jeter. But like a lot of Yankee fans I know, I've always had the feeling it wasn't until Jeter's full-speed face-plant into the stands that A Rod realized what, exactly, all the fuss is about.
The list goes on and on. Yesterday's HR was just the latest.
Posted by bill at 09:38 AM | Comments (0)
April 11, 2006
State-sponsored euphemisms, or "Muslims don't murder innocent people. Root causes murder innocent people" or REMINDER: "Jihad" is NOT a harmless concept meaning "decaf latte with skimmed milk and cinnamon sprinkles
The EU's public relations department has decided not to hurt Islamic terrorists' feelings and are hoping to transform the terrorim-labeling lexicon. Reuters reports: "EU officials are working on what they call a "lexicon" for public communication on terrorism and Islam, designed to make clear that there is nothing in the religion to justify outrages like the September 11 attacks or the bombings of Madrid and London....'Jihad means something for you and me, it means something else for a Muslim. Jihad is a perfectly positive concept of trying to fight evil within yourself,' said the official, speaking anonymously because the review is an internal one that is not expected to be made public."
Oh I get it. It's the root causes, stupid! ("Muslims don't murder innocent people. Root causes murder innocent people."). But still, I'm struggling here. I seem to remember differently.
Posted by bill at 04:23 PM | Comments (0)
Barry, don't go away angry -- just go away (Part II)
ESPN's Chuck Klosterman weighs in on Bonds' imminent "achievement of disenchantment":
Ruth was a troubling person, but he's a wonderful idea; Bonds is a troubling person who's an empty idea. For his entire career, Barry Bonds has embodied nothing. Now he will embody only this, and "this" isn't good for anyone. He's just compiling numbers we don't trust, and they are as colossal as they are meaningless. To care about these home runs is to care about nothing.
Posted by bill at 12:01 PM | Comments (0)
No Madre, No Padre
In the postmodernist rush to abolish all traditional values, Spain's socialist government is removing the terms "Mother" and "Father" from birth certificates and replacing these titles with "Progenitor A" and "Progenitor B" in order to accommodate the legalization of gay marriage in that European nation. (How they plan to circumvent biology, they have not yet announced.)
Surprisingly, lesbians are among the first to balk at the administrative change on the grounds that in Spanish the term for "progenitor" is inherently male in nature. I guess it won't be long until those sensitive to the implications of hierarchy will be offended to the labeling of "A" and "B" since one would be listed before and thus above the other.
If things continue down this path, eventually no one will be permitted to speak at all since to translate thought into words and speech is itself a form of auditory rape since the act of communication puts the recipient of the message in a submissive position as the recipient is then bound by semiotic conformity through such cognitive intrusion.
Posted by Meekins at 09:42 AM | Comments (0)
April 10, 2006
Duke lacrosse: Surrogate for whitey
Remember Tawana Brawley? How could we forget:
Tawana Brawley, at 15, was having a little more adult fun than a girl her age should be having and, instead of going home to face her parents, wrote racial slurs on her own body, smeared feces on her face and crawled into a garbage heap. Her explanation was that she had been abducted and raped by six white men. [Democratic Presidential candidate the Reverend Al] Sharpton, Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason jumped into the fray and not only accused Pagones of taking part in the rape and desecration of Brawley but in the murder of Harry Crist, who had killed himself after being attached to the case by Sharpton and the boys...So now, not only is Sharpton continuing to propagate the Brawley lie, he also has Crist's blood on his hands, though he clearly thinks nothing of it...Sharpton, Maddox and Mason were eventually, more than a decade after the fact, found guilty of 15 counts of defamation, for which Sharpton ended up paying Pagones $87,000, as Russert mentioned. Moreover, when Sharpton learned the accusations were a lie, he said nothing of it;
The despicable conduct surrounding Tawana Brawley's lies, including the media's complicity, went on to become the definitive example of "personal destruction" through racial mob politics. Lessons learned? Hardly. As LaShawn Barber points out, the flimsy "Duke rape" case may be turning into a Brawley redux:"...much of the outrage is based not on what may have happened to the stripper but on class envy and covetousness. A predominantly black city resents the heck out of the predominantly white private university in its midst, and a rape allegation provides an excuse to throw accusations of racism. Some of Duke's black students, many of whom were probably admitted on a separate admissions track euphemistically known as "affirmative action," have joined the madding crowd. No one, of course, wants to wait for the evidence except the prosecutor, who hasn't charged anyone. But is it true, or is this just another Tawana Brawley-type hoax?
If by "Tawana Brawley-type hoax" LB means, "fabricated," this remains to be seen; if on the other hand it means, "no accountability for racist blacks, the giddy media and their whores," let's face it: the answer is already a resounding "yes."
Posted by bill at 05:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Begging for hate mail
In a pickle? Black? Never worry again - courtesy of The People's Cube, just reach for your race card:
Posted by bill at 01:38 PM | Comments (0)
April 07, 2006
Who says golfers aren't athletes?
John Daly, that's who:
(H/T: Deadspin.com)
Posted by bill at 03:53 PM | Comments (0)
Questions for MSM
Just what did Bush supposedly "leak" through Scooter Libby? We know what it wasn't--the supposedly secret Plame info. So just what was it? Fitzgerald's report doesn't say anything classified was leaked (or so Mark Levin said last night on his radio program). A.G. Alberto Gonzalez said something with which I can agree, to wit, that the President has inherent authority to release intelligence information. How can something be "classified" if the chief executive has effectively declassified it?
After 24 hours or so of the news cycle, I've still yet to read or hear just what intelligence Libby is supposed to have "leaked," and why it matters to anybody now or then. It is routine for government officials to release info to the media through unofficial channels, and through people who speak on the condition of anonymity. Maybe the Washington press corps would be happier if this practice stopped. Some how, I doubt it.
Isn't the real story here President Clinton's veto of the bill that would have criminalized such leaking?
UPDATE: Libby only gave Judy Miller "a brief abstract of the NIE's key judgments," including that Iraq "was vigorously trying to pursue" uranium.
But this was not a secret. Colin Powell was telling the same thing to the UN, and Bush was saying it as well. What really annoys the Democrats here is that it refutes the notion that "Bush lied" about Iraqi ambitions for WMD. It also further shows that Wilson's claims were wrong and he was not credibile on the issue.
Posted by GadsdenFlag at 09:52 AM | Comments (0)
April 06, 2006
BFD: Least surprising breaking news of the day
So Meredith Vieira, the new Today Show host is an anti-war protestor. Anyone surprised?
Posted by bill at 05:41 PM | Comments (0)
E unum pluribus - Republican sellout
One reliable sign conservatives have been hosed by Senate Republicans is that John McCain and Harry Reid are together announcing "progress," with Ted Kennedy along for the ride. Today Republicans abandoned their base, endorsing amnesty for illegal immigrants who've been in the U.S. for more than two years. Those who stay illegally (is that a misnomer now?) and are caught get the functional equivalent of a parking ticket, and deportation not available until three (!) violations, to say nothing of the Senate's unwillingness to say anything about enforcement or address the "carrot" of billions in entitlement programs.
I get the feeling Senate Republicans have underestimated their base -- we know where Bush stands but will the HoR respond?
Some reactions:
- Michelle Malkin suggests a Flag Day, of sorts.
- John Hinderaker wonders why "bi-partisanship" means the Republicans do what Democrats want.
- RedState on immigration.
Posted by bill at 01:40 PM | Comments (0)
Barry, don't go away angry -- just go away.
Like so many drug addicts, many in baseball seem to realize they should quit Barry Bonds, but can't. Bonds is at most a few weeks from hitting home run #715* and surpassing Babe Ruth's mark**, and as the moment approaches there's a clear sense it should be celebrated, but perhaps most appropriately by throwing 715 syringes at Bonds. Or maybe the fireworks could include the likeness of a swelling, then exploding human head.
MLB is in a weird spot, and however the league opts to celebrate, there will be plenty of polite applause, especially in San Francisco, where probably aren't ballsy enough to boo, as they should. In any case, the rest of us will just be glad when the moment is past. And we'll be glad when Barry Bonds just goes away.
* Bonds cheated.
** Ruth didn't cheat.
Posted by bill at 09:17 AM | Comments (0)
April 04, 2006
Seriously, who needs newspapers?
Never occurred to me: the cartoon strip Mallard Fillmore is on the web. As the Eds at the Seattle Post-Intellegencier say he is a "seasoned, rumpled ex-newspaper reporter, Mallard now works for WFDR-TV in Washington, D.C. The fact that he's a duck doesn't stand out at Channel 3 nearly as much as that his politics are a lot more like yours and mine than Peter Jennings' and Jane Fonda's. He thinks we average, hardworking Americans need a break instead of a lecture. Mallard thinks taxes are too high, educational standards are too low, and that the "radicals" of the '60s and '70s now set the establishment's politically correct media agenda. He's gonna shake 'em up a little."
For a while, too, Mallard Fillmore has been the token "conservative" strip in most newspapers. Bookmark it!
Posted by bill at 10:28 PM | Comments (0)
Hey France, "Get back to work!"
Or, to quote George Thorogood, "Get a haircut and get a real job."
Reports the BBC, one Englishman is calling the French socialists as he sees them:
Philip Meeson, the chairman and chief executive of Yorkshire[UK]-based budget carrier Jet2.com, launched his attack in an article on the company website.
The article's headline said: "Jet2.com condemns French strike action and calls for lazy frogs to get back to work!"Meeson continues:
After a token stoppage why can't you just sort the matter out amicably without bringing thousands of people around the world, who give your country huge economic wealth, into the argument? Whilst France is undeniably a beautiful country...we are appalled and quite frankly tired of the air traffic controllers' old-fashioned attitude to dealing with any issues they may have. In short, we urge the French air traffic controllers to get back to work or get another job.
Posted by bill at 12:05 PM | Comments (0)
April 03, 2006
Option 2: Moussaoui thrown into, then off of, burning skyscraper
I am not a big fan of Jonathan "double hearsay" Turley but as Powerline notes today, Turley makes a legitimate argument that it's unusual in the least, in American law, to execute a defendant based upon something less than active participation in a crime. It's a good point, that is, as long as Zacarias Moussaoui should be treated like a garden variety American criminal defendant.
Let's say Turley's right -- and assume his qualms with the death penalty here (Turley explains them here) are reasonable -- from the perspective of American justice. If he's right, and if there are issues or "wrinkles" in this prosecution that are occasioned by the justice system, and if these mean we cannot simply throw this man off a burning building, this only demonstrates that the criminal justice system is not equipped to do "justice" in the sense in which Moussaoui deserves it. It does not mean we anguish over whether Moussaoui's been treated fairly, etc. etc. Ultimately the American people want Moussaoui dead for reasons that cannot be accomodated by the American justice system, and yet they are perfectly legitimate, no?
We cannot prosecute this war and win it, with an approach to terrorist justice that is, in a word, Clintonian. John Hinderaker says the verdict today "probably won't mean much, one way or the other." That may be true, and if so it's unfortunate, because it should be important. But Hinderaker might be ignoring the pernicious effects of the Moussaoui circus itself (appeal anyone?) -- it is a study in the problems with the Clintonian war our present government wants to fight.
Posted by bill at 08:19 PM | Comments (0)
