Blogito, Ergo Sum
by Gregg Calkins
1 May 2010, a Saturday
NYTimes headline:
Officials have assailed BP’s response, but the federal government also had opportunities to move more quickly and did not do so. President Obama will visit the region on Sunday.
Yep, here it is already:
WASHINGTON — There’s a world of difference between the impact of an
There’s a world of difference in White House press corps, that’s for sure.
Justice Dept.'s investigation of firm goes beyond financial deals targeted by SEC in fraud suit brought last month, law enforcement sources say.
I don’t claim to understand the financing behind all of this, but when you sell one of your investors something and then bet against him making any money from it, something is clearly morally wrong here. Criminally wrong, perhaps.
Hollywood intellectuals are
speaking out:LOS ANGELES - "Family Guy" creator Seth MacFarlane has compared a tough new immigration law in Arizona to those of Nazi Germany.
MacFarlane, whose irreverent animated TV comedies have themselves provoked controversy, said the Arizona law was more shocking than anything he had done on television.
"It's too much. It's kind of a slap in the face, it's not the way to handle it...Nobody but the Nazis ever asked anybody for their papers," MacFarlane told Reuters Television in an interview on Thursday.
I’ve been as far as Nevada, he said, and I’ve never heard of such a thing. He ought to do a little more world travel to countries of which he is not a citizen and find out when he is required to carry and show his passport and when he is not.
He probably wasn’t even born during the time of Nazi Germany and I’ll bet would have told you Costa Rica was a wonderful, free country.
What do you want to bet he doesn’t know that FDR caused the federal statute to be created?
Here’s a book I don’t want to read:In just one of the revelations in this politically radioactive release, the book uncovers for the first time where and how Obama first met Weatherman founder Bill Ayers – and it is much earlier than previously believed.
In his 1995 autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Obama writes about a speech given during his college years in connection with Students for Economic Democracy. SED was a campus group affiliated with Tom Hayden, one of the principal organizers of Students for a Democratic Society, the 1960s antiwar movement from which Ayers’ Weatherman splintered.
The book ties Obama to a number of other radicals who were associated with SED’s parent group, whose founding members included fellow antiwar protesters, a politician known to be a communist collaborator, and a founding member of the Black Panthers.
Until now, little has been revealed about Obama’s college years, with the president refusing to release his transcript or comment in depth about which specific individuals or organizations he was associated with,
The Manchurian President
also reveals Obama’s associations with the Nation of Islam, Black Liberation Theology and black political extremists, with extensive new information on the subjects.Also detailed are Obama’s deep ties to ACORN, which are much more extensive than previously documented elsewhere. The book additionally describes how a socialist-led, ACORN-affiliated union helped facilitate Obama’s political career and now exerts major influence in the White House.
The Manchurian President
contains potentially explosive information not only about President Obama but also concerning other officials in the White House, including top czars and senior advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod.I’m plenty sick about just what we already knew, and elected him anyhow.
Andy McCarthy on the Arizona flap:The severe economic, social and criminal problem Arizonans are dealing with is illegal immigration from Mexico. If you say our law must be "race-neutral" in dealing with a problem in which race (or ethnicity/natural-origin) is unavoidably central, that is tantamount to saying the law cannot deal with the problem. That’s ludicrous.
The issue is not racial simply because they come from Mexico, nor is it sexist if most of them are men, nor is it religious if a majority of them are Catholics...these are all smoke-and-mirror arguments.
The question is entirely one legality. Legal Mexicans, male or Catholic or not, are fine; illegal ones are not. The "brown skin" argument is likewise stupid; not all Mexicans, legal or illegal, have brown skin.
Linda makes the unassailable point that the new law does nothing to secure the border. I agree – I argued that Arizona was acting because the federal government had failed to act. Linda further notes that illegal immigration and crime in general are down, but that hardly means Arizonans don’t have a severe problem – kidnapping, a staple of Mexico’s drug wars, is now so rampant in Phoenix that lawyers are
So, you don’t think it’s a problem in Arizona?