Obama spoke on immigration yesterday and included this headscratcher:
"Contrary to some of the reports that you see, crime along the border is down."
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer would differ. So, is that claim reality-based, or is it just another government faith-based initiative?
The NY Times made a similar claim recently, although the statistics they cited failed to support their point - briefly, they relied on metropolitan crime statistics for Arizona, which have been falling, and ignored rural crime stats, which have been rising.
And in any case, the FBI statistics only went through 2008; preliminary data is available for some cities through 2009, but that does not resolve the border question.
So - does anyone in the reality-based community or elsewhere have anything like actual evidence in support of Obama's claim? If there is a supportive fact sheet at the White House immigration page I am not seeing it.
ERRATA: IF, I say if crime is down it may be because the recession turned off the jobs magnet or due to more vigorous border enforcement; neither reason would vindicate Obama and the "no worries" crowd, since we think that one day the recession will end and that increased enforcement was in response to a real problem.
. . . neither reason would vindicate Obama and the "no worries" crowd, since we think that one day the recession will end . . .
Well, they may have a point there. Because if their contention is that the recession won't end as long as Obama is at the helm, I can find very little evidence to refute it.
Hopefully that's not the change they meant.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 02, 2010 at 09:05 AM
TM Stop with the logic already. Instread of facts and reason, you need to use emotions and feelings, and lie like a wood floor if necessary. It the only play in the prog playbook besides spend like Bernie Madoff with OPM...
Posted by: Gmax | July 02, 2010 at 09:16 AM
4 months until the shock heard round the world.
Posted by: Gmax | July 02, 2010 at 09:18 AM
Here, at CNBC, is a story featuring the theory that the Republicans are intentionally sabotaging the economy by not supporting unemployment extensions to infinity and other beastly acts, to reap electoral gains.
Seems to me the Dems are doing a pretty good job of this all by themselves. In fact, since Mr. Valliere's critique includes noting the Bush tax cuts should be extended, one wonders why the theme of the story wasn't how Barry and the Dems are intentionally sabotaging the economy.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 02, 2010 at 09:26 AM
Post-modern America: illegals welcome, Bibles banned. See LUN.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 09:27 AM
Between the over-the-moon meeting between obama and medvedev, followed by our arresting the russian spies and, days later, our clueless leader saying he knew it all the time, to the great immigration-no-violence-on-our-borders speech, followed by the large-casualty shoot-out on the mexican/arizona border.....his timing is awful, his positions dreadful and the clear evidence that obama is both stupid AND clueless is becoming more obvious every day.
Posted by: J | July 02, 2010 at 09:31 AM
"No educational benefit", TC. For the uneducable, perhaps.
===================
Posted by: What an absolute, and absolutely wrong, conclusion. | July 02, 2010 at 09:33 AM
Tammy Bruce, makes mincemeat of the President's puerile arguments, such as he
has any, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 09:35 AM
Minus 20 at Raz today.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 02, 2010 at 09:39 AM
Yeah TC. It is as though the left thinks the Bible has supernatural powers & if any little eyes peak into it they may be convinced of its Truth. I guess it is a compliment really.
One Religious Freedom Day with banned Bibles vs Kevin Jennings sexual freedom literature distributed every day by the school clinic.
Hopefully a few kids will read the Bible cause we're gonna need them to minister to and take care of, spiritually & physically, the kids that bought into the sexual freedom lies.
Posted by: Janet | July 02, 2010 at 09:46 AM
So, a London paper, probably the Telegraph reveals that Mrs. Chapman, nee Kuschenko, was
the daughter of a KGB official, which kind of
explains alot, the Russian version of Sidney
Bristow, kind of
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 09:49 AM
DoT:
Minus 20 at Raz today.
Unexpected.
(I was expecting 21)
Posted by: hit and run | July 02, 2010 at 09:59 AM
Does anyone else see the humor in the "deadliest border shootout" on the heels of the "let's let all the illagals in" speech?
Karma is a bitch
Posted by: Jane | July 02, 2010 at 10:10 AM
Its quite possible that crime is going down in AZ. Within a couple of weeks after AZ passed the immigration law, there were reports (LUN) in the papers of illegal immigrants packing it up and moving out of Arizona in order to avoid getting arrested.
Since one of the arguments in favor of the AZ law was that illegal immigrants were committing a disproportionate amount of crimes, it only makes sense that crime rates would go down after they left the state.
Posted by: Tom R | July 02, 2010 at 10:11 AM
We missed Obama's anniversary.
No,not his wedding anniversary. That's Oct 3.
June 29th was the one year anniversary of the last time Obama was in positive territory on Rasmussen's approval index.
Happy Anniversary Obama!
Posted by: hit and run | July 02, 2010 at 10:12 AM
I have to get up really early in the morning to beat DoT's Ras report.
My latest PJM is up
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/scotus-decision-attacks-honest-services-law/?singlepage=true>Honest services smackdown
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 10:26 AM
The next timre idiot talking head mouths the talking point that the immigration issue is good politics for Democrats, remember this and just smile. Progressives for Immigration Reform says enforcement first? Yikes for Democrats. That leaves only International Answer and La Raza!
Posted by: Gmax | July 02, 2010 at 10:28 AM
Hell, Clarice, it's three hours earlier out here. But it's my job to observe and report.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 02, 2010 at 10:32 AM
"That leaves only International Answer and La Raza!", the media and whomever Pew can influence with lying polls and "scholarly articles".
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Great article, Clarice. As a news junkie addicted to the internet, can you tell me whether either Skilling or Black will be getting a new trial? Will Black be released from prison?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 02, 2010 at 10:46 AM
Great article, Clarice.
Perhaps this is another area where we might be able to learn from foreign courts.
Vietnam frees 3 convicted rapists after acupuncturist claims dot on ear proved them virgins
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2010 at 10:48 AM
DoT:
But it's my job to observe and report.
And it's a job being counted as created or saved by the Obama administration.
Posted by: hit and run | July 02, 2010 at 10:48 AM
It's a wonder we get anywhere with these idiots,< a href="http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201006281803dowjonesdjonline000357&title=oil-chiefs-leave-meeting-with-interior-disappointed> oil chiefs leave meeting with interior disappointed
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 10:52 AM
There are other counts Skilling was convicted on, DoT; I don't remember anything else Black or Kipnis were--or at least nothing of significance that sticks in my mind.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 10:54 AM
narciso's link
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2010 at 10:55 AM
Narciso, the "<" and the "a" have to be together.
Posted by: boris | July 02, 2010 at 10:56 AM
My recollection was a bit faulty. Here's the npr account of the convictions:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11948939
I believe the mail fraud charges are inextricably linked to the honest services count and may have to be tossed.
The obstruction count was preposterous--he removed files copies of which had been given to the govt because his landlord insisted he do so. The files were not destroyed and he moved them in clear view of the video cameras, evincing no intent to hide what he was doing.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Where am I messing up. with the slash, before or after the a in the tag
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Pew:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 02, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Thanks, Clarice. Why hasn;t Black been released? I haven't seen a word on this subject.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 02, 2010 at 10:59 AM
FNC reporting Hatch announced he'll vote against Kagan.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 11:01 AM
The matter was remanded to the District Court and I expect the lawyers have filed motions on this--If I see anything I'll post it.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 11:08 AM
[a href="site URL"]Text you want displayed[/a]
Use < for [, > for ].
You need the quotes on the URL, and the slash in the right place at the end.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2010 at 11:09 AM
I particularly liked your article Clarice, in that a legal nincompoop - which I definitely am - could easily understand the issue of "honest services" and how it has been abused. I hope more people, like me, read it.
Also, I want to thank DoT - he asked every question I wanted to ask about Conrad Black and what happens now.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:13 AM
FNC reporting Hatch announced he'll vote against Kagan.
He's still a squish who's been in office too long and needs to be shown the door.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Yep, cc; magnifico, c&DoT.
===========
Posted by: Never in a million years would I have figured that out myself, nor read such analysis in MSM. Here, it's half an hour, during which I also did a bunch of other things. | July 02, 2010 at 11:17 AM
Also, I too heard the Hatch announcement that he is voting against the Kagan nomination on FNC this morning. I kinda chuckled to myself, thinking after his announcement yesterday that there would be no filibuster, he probably got quite a bit of negative feedback and wanted to be first up with his news this A.M.
I still want every Republican to filibuster, but I realize Graham is just a lost cause.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:18 AM
I totally agree with you Captain. But, alas, we see how quickly a new, young, Senator also becomes full of himself and his mis-perceived power, ala Scott Brown.
I have just about had it with all politicians of every stripe!
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:21 AM
The Nittany Liars have absolved Michael Piltdown Mann of wrongdoing, but the report quotes Richard Lindzen 'What is going on here?'
Fisking of the committee's conclusions at lun and at climateaudit.org
The members have made fools of themselves. You don't have to know the inside baseball to understand that.
====================
Posted by: He's a rock star so he must be OK. | July 02, 2010 at 11:21 AM
I realize Graham is just a lost cause.
Specter isn't, though. It'd be just like that slime-ball to screw the Dems on his way out.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2010 at 11:25 AM
Fitzgerald seems in retrospect, exactly the kind of Savanarola that the press painted Starr as, it's dubious how effective he was prosecuting terrorists, since he let Ali Mohammed slip throught his fingers for 5 years. He forced out George Ryan, but he has taken pains not to focus that sort of attention on Obama's connections with REzko, which run all the way into London and other European Baathist circles, He pursued Libby, much like Ahab in part to satisfy a decade old grudge, He went after
Black using Radler, who was knee deep in the
whole Hollinger mess, the Telegraph is still
miles ahead of the Times, but it was a signal to weaken the strongest pro WOT/ Israel paper on the continent, and other
efforts like the Sun
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Well, with Specter, one never knows. He just might be spiteful enough. What am I saying? Of course he IS spiteful enough.
My only problem is - who does he want to "screw" more Republicans or Democrats? Decisions, decisions.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:32 AM
My only problem is - who does he want to "screw" more Republicans or Democrats? Decisions, decisions.
You left out the most likely choice: voters!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | July 02, 2010 at 11:34 AM
Remarkable, Kim, they cherry picked the sample of emails, in order to show their was no cherry picking involved, and "now for my next trick"
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 11:34 AM
I have just about had it with all politicians of every stripe!
Me too cc; unfortunately the system is rigged in favor of incumbents. Regarding Scott Brown, he came into office on a real media blitz which, to somebody with an already unhealthily large ego to even reach the position to run for US Senate, was a doubtlessly intoxicating substance. Still being from Mass we knew he wouldn't be a *real* conservative; but he's better than Coakley would've been so he accomplished that.
Still it would help if we had a party that could crack the whip on squishes that get too comfy with the perqs of office. Look at McCain who should be arm-in-arm with Jan Brewer except the toothless Mav has secured the endorsements of the squishes at NRO (that way too many JOMers fawn over) and Murdoch so he can go back to his standard stabbing conservatives in the back mode.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 11:39 AM
Well, which party seems ascendant at the moment? Hell, he could even switch sides between now and January, maybe get some sort of deal for his sons in the bargian. I know I'd be talking to him if I were McConnell.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2010 at 11:41 AM
Captain: McCain is another of those politicians that I use the mute button for. I cannot stand the way the man talks!
I sent an email to Andy McCarthy thanking him for his dissent on the NRO endorsement. I really like to read Mark Steyn and Jim Geraghty, and a paltry few others. Goldberg (another narcissist if you ask me) Lowry and Lopez are just about worthless. They should just start a Battlestar Galactica blog and leave NRO to more serious folks.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:50 AM
Personally, I find Commentary and Weekly Standard far superior to much of what NRO dishes out with their esteemed Editors.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Reuters says Black's obstruction charge woud not be affected by the ruling.
****he decision affects three counts of fraud for which Black was convicted by a Chicago jury. But the 65-year-old former press baron still faces a hurdle in that he was also found guilty of obstructing justice by removing boxes of evidence from his Toronto office in defiance of a court order.***
In describing the obstruction count I forgot to mention the testimony that the court order prohibiting the removal (of the DUPLICATE papers) was not conveyed to Black before he removed them at his landlord's insistence.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 11:52 AM
This is of course, the problem, once we get them in office, you still have some of the same vacilators at the top of the heap. Well I've said my peace about McCain, he's sort of
splunge right now, but one never knows
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 11:56 AM
cc, I'm a big Weekly Standard fan myself. Some of the past trolls have fixated on Kristol, which is always my seal of approval.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 11:57 AM
It's one of my faves, too Captn, although they occasionally can go off kilter, like the Continetti piece, that tried and failed with
the Beck/Santelli dichotomy
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Yeah narc, there are some false notes for me as well (something about Fred Barnes's writing style drives me up a wall although I appreciate the legwork he does to get the story) but those are far outweighed by the good. Plus nobody skewers a horrible film like Podhoretz.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 12:12 PM
OK, n, that's going over to Watts Up. And what a remarkable insight about Fitz.
===========
Posted by: You need a prize. Take the Russian's. | July 02, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Yep, narciso, Continetti was really a disappointment in his Tea Party piece. I used to really enjoy Goldfarb on the blog, but he seems to have given up that chore.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 12:16 PM
Thank you for that article, Clarice. I wonder which party Richard Breeden is a member of.
Looks like Hatch learned something from Bennett's defeat in the Utah primary.
Miss Lindsay didn't.
Posted by: caro | July 02, 2010 at 12:20 PM
My take is that Lowry has improved a lot in the past few months. It may have something to do with his engagement.
Posted by: caro | July 02, 2010 at 12:28 PM
He pursued Libby, much like Ahab in part to satisfy a decade old grudge
Or like Walsh going after Weinberger when the Congressional
witch huntshow trial effectively kept him from going after larger prey. The special prosecutor statute is just horrible law, running roughshod over the rights of the accused. Bush was an idiot to let the insane press posse goad him into appointing Fitz.Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 12:28 PM
All hands on deck, Steele opened his mouth again
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 12:30 PM
narciso, I think it is quite clever. It's jiu-jitsu, but I mourn for those cantering down a dark defile, now.
============
Posted by: God be with you. | July 02, 2010 at 12:35 PM
What you say is you have commit the time and resources to an operation, sort of like that
'laser like' focus on health care, but not this:
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Dear God; Steele gift wraps a July 4 gift to Odipshit. Kristol calls for his head; please do the right thing, country clubbers (who am I kidding..)
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 12:46 PM
our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols. It won’t work.
Too bad about that honest services law. Obama's certainly depriving us of his.
Or maybe I'm reading that quote wrong. Maybe he's endorsing a moat.
Posted by: bgates | July 02, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Are the Steele remarks being discussed above the ones covered in the LUNed article and amateur video? If so, Steele must go. I realize that in informal settings, folks often say things they wouldn't in a more formal event. In addition, it's a bummer to be caught on amateur video. But this is too much. He has betrayed GWB and every GOPer who has been urging Obama to pursue the Afghanistan war with vigor.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 01:06 PM
Bgates that statement from Obama that "it won't work" or effectively "we can't do it", really, really crisped my toast. When was the last time we heard a United States President say "we can't do something" which was clearly in our power? That statement, and the contemptible SOB who made it, are both disgusting.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | July 02, 2010 at 01:08 PM
See LUN for the Kristol letter to Steele. I hope whatever adults exist in GOP leadership are communicating with Steele and telling him he needs to clear out his desk at the RNC today.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 01:13 PM
Well 'we can put a man on the moon' but we won't because it's too expensive or something
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 01:15 PM
--Bgates that statement from Obama that "it won't work" or effectively "we can't do it", really, really crisped my toast.--
Barry's campaign theme 2012: "No we can't."
Or perhaps, "No, no pueda." is more in context.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 02, 2010 at 01:17 PM
It would be a good weekend to do fire him.
Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: "We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!
Posted by: Stephanie | July 02, 2010 at 01:18 PM
Obama is too stupid to get it.
WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING FART ABOUT IMMIGRATION POLICY.
We want the border secured. We DO NOT WANT ILLEGALS here.
This nonsense about COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM has NOTHING to do with the ISSUE the American people are angry about.
Posted by: GUS | July 02, 2010 at 01:24 PM
WaPo has another issue about to bite them in the ass.
Chum, baby, Chum!
LUN
Posted by: Stephanie | July 02, 2010 at 01:24 PM
It is a false premise argument to even discuss that "crime is down along the border". Do not fall for it. The numbers that describe the "crime statistics" do not include each and every time that someone crosses the border without permission, which is a CRIME.
The law needing to be enforced is illegal border crossings STUPID. If the number of illegal border crossings is correct, then any local town/city/county with that level of crime would declare MARTIAL LAW to get things under control.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | July 02, 2010 at 01:31 PM
"Contrary to some of the reports that you see, crime along the border is down."
Kevin Bacon: All is well!
The Animal House Presidency.
Posted by: Stephanie | July 02, 2010 at 01:37 PM
Steele really needs to go, but I am afraid he will have to resign, rather than be fired. The screams of racism would never cease.
I think that the strategy from serious GOP fundraisers has been to simply bypass him. Now, it is more than a fundraising issue - I hope enough pressure is brought to bear, that he wants to spend more time with his family.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 01:38 PM
Well, that' undoubtedly why Kristol asked him to be patriotic and resign.
I know what Steele attempted to say..and he failed utterly.
I am surprised. I thought he was too clever to be such a dunderhead.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 01:47 PM
Posted by: Neo | July 02, 2010 at 01:51 PM
Clarice, I'm surprised that an RNC head would even venture into this territory. Let's say Steele had made an effective statement that Obama has used Afghanistan for political purposes instead of focusing on a strategy that was best for the country and then executing it. I still think such a statement is likely enough to be subject to manipulation by the DNC that the RNC head shouldn't be dipping his or her toe into that ocean, much less plunging in over his or her head.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 01:56 PM
Well, it depends on the occasion and circumstances and I confess I haven't gone to the video to find out myself but I believe it was an informal discussion in which he didn't anticipate being on the record.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 02:02 PM
I still think such a statement is likely enough to be subject to manipulation by the DNC that the RNC head shouldn't be dipping his or her toe into that ocean, much less plunging in over his or her head.
Except that the current RNC head has been better for the DNC than the current DNC head.
What's the old saying? Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | July 02, 2010 at 02:03 PM
This week's pieces has been put to bed as we ink stained angels of the press say. bgates quiz features prominently--the editor loved it--and we are experimenting with making it an article, something I've been begging him to do, Making it a blog means it vanished in hours. He was reluctant to do that because it is really a feature piece but i think the readers deserve a good laugh in all this tsunami of dreck and bad news.
I think it'll be up sunday but maybe he'll run it on Saturday. Anyway, hats off to bgates again.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 02:14 PM
Naw, he's put it on Obama, as did McChrystal, and left open that we have other ways of satisfying our interests there.
========================
Posted by: I don't like it that we are going to appear to lose, but let the appearance fall on Obama. | July 02, 2010 at 02:16 PM
I agree, Clarice - the placement of C's P's in the blog, means it moves off the page too quickly and could easily get missed.
Since it is a regular, recurring feature, it should have either a dedicated "spot" or be nestled in with the other articles.
Looking forward to reading it.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2010 at 02:32 PM
((Yeah TC. It is as though the left thinks the Bible has supernatural powers & if any little eyes peak into it they may be convinced of its Truth. ))
... the parts that describe what happens to nations that forsake God are especially germane. The biggest secret weapon the U.S.A. has is that it, more than any other nation, is populated by people who love God and read and love the Bible. I am convinced that is a huge protective unacknowledged metaphysical power at work.
Posted by: Parking Lot | July 02, 2010 at 02:38 PM
well, that's what I've been arguing for, cc.
I know it takes me as long to put it together as it takes to write some of the regular articles.
we don't as yet have any other options like dedicated spots.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 02:39 PM
I listened to the video, clarice, and I think your characterization of it as informal is correct. From his tone, it was clear he wasn't expecting it to be on the record. And I hope I am wrong in how this can be spun by the Dems (for example, a Dem US Senate candidate asking the GOP opponent in a debate whether, were the GOPer elected as a US Senator, he or she would base his or her voting on Afghanistan being Obama's war or America's war). Unfair, but when you're the GOP head honcho, being aware that we live in the era of little video and sound recording devices accessible to all seems to me to be a job requirement.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 02:41 PM
((explains alot, the Russian version of Sidney
Bristow, kind of))
although the overweight Latina is not a bit like Sidney's sister eh?
Posted by: Parking Lot | July 02, 2010 at 02:41 PM
A few things about Steele:
1. What he said is not nearly as bad as numerous things Reid, Pelosi, Senator Odipshit, Murtha (RIH), Kerry, Durbin et al have said in the past regarding the troops and their missions.
2. Given #1, it is unacceptible for *any* so-called Republican, much less the head of the party, to not unquestioningly support the troops and their missions even in an unguarded "gotcha" moment. Steele was entrusted when put in that position to be on the job 24/7 so being caught unaware is *not* an excuse. He has already been caught violating this 24/7 requirement by writing a book for his own benefit.
3. Whoever chose Steele illustrated the same level of poor decision-making as the McCain campaign and should never be put in a position of influencing personnel choices or candidate strategies again.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 02, 2010 at 02:55 PM
Charlie Cook says the Dems are hosed in November. He pays particular attention to the voter enthusiasm gap.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 02, 2010 at 02:55 PM
narciso:
My Hot Links Cheat Sheet might be helpful. You can just keep it in your bookmarks as a permanent aide memoire.
Posted by: JM Hanes | July 02, 2010 at 02:56 PM
Even I, who can't fathom the fuss about that sport that has appropriated the name of football from the real thing, recognizes that what is described in the LUN is big. :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 02:56 PM
Even I, who can't fathom the fuss about that sport that has appropriated the name of football from the real thing, recognizes that what is described in the LUN is big. :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 02:56 PM
The good news is, his statement seems to indicate he believes the the hate crimes against Hispanics (that had doubled in 2007-2008* due to Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh) must be going down. At least on the borders.
Posted by: MayBee | July 02, 2010 at 03:03 PM
It was a great game, TC, and like you I am not a soccer fan.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 02, 2010 at 03:06 PM
Now bookmarked, JMH. I hope I can remember to use it.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | July 02, 2010 at 03:07 PM
OK, let me test whether I understand JMH's hot links lecture notes.
JMH's blog
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 02, 2010 at 03:07 PM
Post-modern America: illegals welcome, Bibles banned.
Another example - USA Today Touts Atheist Summer Camp
I remember the WaPo article on how useless church summer mission trips were.
Churches Retool Mission Trips
Work Abroad Criticized for High Cost and Lack of Value
You know how the left has never wasted a dime overseas. All things atheist related=good, all things Bible related=bad.
Posted by: Janet | July 02, 2010 at 03:08 PM
--From his tone, it was clear he wasn't expecting it to be on the record.--
I would hope that an RNC head would, even in his off the record comments, tie them, no matter how tenuously, to the real world. It's not that he was expressing an unpopular opinion he was making abysmally ignorant, stupid and factually incorrect remarks.
He most reminds me of Fearless Fosdick, supposedly setting the world aright, oblivious to the carnage and bodies sprawled in his wake.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 02, 2010 at 03:19 PM
Whoever chose Steele...
Captain--the head of the RNC runs for that position. Now it may be that "the books are cooked" to a certain extent but Steele did have opposition and it took a number of ballots for him to win.
Posted by: glasater | July 02, 2010 at 03:31 PM
After careful examination, ahem, Captain, Anna Kuschenko looks like a Russian version
of Kaylee from Firefly, but in the earlier
pictures she could have passed for a young
Irina Derevko.
Clarice, you included the folk song to fossil fuels, in that roundup. right,
Posted by: narciso | July 02, 2010 at 03:33 PM
Definitely did, narciso..Definitely.
Posted by: Clarice | July 02, 2010 at 03:37 PM