What I'm thinking on immigration...

I've only heard/read secondhand accounts of the Congressional immigration legislation -- legislation I believe the Senate has since shot down -- but if true, I think it is an extremely bad idea to make it a felony to "deliver assistance" to illegal immigrants. (That is the term I heard quoted; laughable in its lack of legal clarity if accurate.)

Everything in my American and Christian upbringing is offended by that idea. Frankly, the discussions on kicking out 12 million people, or footing the bill to lock 1/2 that many up, making the head of a household (we usually call him Dad) leave every few years on a hope and a prayer he can come back, making it a felony to "deliver assistance" (?) (food? insulin?), fining illegal migrant workers some whopping percentage of their income, folks on bullhorns shouting "criminals!" at people they don't know jack about -- a lot of it goes against my moral grain... and its turning my tide to a more sweeping approach than I had previously assessed. Yes, we need to secure our borders, but we also have to remain Americans here. John made an Irish joke earlier... no sweat here... but we have treated our nation to much difficulty in the past when we backlashed against an immigrant group, whether Chinese or Irish or German or Peurto Rican. My grandparents immigrated here, now I'm like all-get-out-entitled.

This is a whopping issue... the more I consider it, the more complex it becomes. I sooo don't know the answers, but I am concerned the combination of heated emotions, election year posturing, polls, and knee jerk reactions will leave us on a course for tomorrow's civil rights movement. I've heard the arguments against amnesty, and don't outright reject them... but I do question if it would be better to deport criminals, and put working illegal families here on a track to citizenship that is forward oriented -- learning the language, laws, etc, not punative -- fines, harassment as a lumped sub-class in our society, etc. All Mexicans -- all Latinos -- whether legal or not, are being ensnared in this growing hostile environment. We're growing hostile to people as groups again. And we've become plumb insane when everyone repeats "jobs Americans won't do..." but never questions what the hey that says about Americans.

A couple weeks ago I thought the "new slavery" leftie stuff was over the top. But I've been thinking about it (ya'll will say mesmerized by the MSM)... we have some x million-odd people we're paying below minimum wages to, under constant threat of harassment by the law, thugs, whatever, with no recourse. Okay, yep, they volunteered to come here, and broke our laws doing it... not the same thing as the history of black slavery, but, you've still got Americans profiting off a sub-class of people. That's not right. And I know, kids are cutting school to protest, they're waving Mexican flags, etc. But, OTOH, they got an idea of how civil protest is done in America, the idea that in America their voice will matter (read: no carbombs, no flag burnings, loves and wants to be in America).

What is still missing from this debate is some of the problems at it's core: How do we farm our food without abusing a class of people -- whether legal or illegal migrant farm workers -- ? America was the world's bread basket... small farms were run by a family's wits and sweat and sold locally. Everybody from Leno to the Congress is commenting on what will happen to the price of peas. That's a problem. If Americans can't produce their own food sensibly without employing a shadow class at below legal pay rates, something more fundamental than documentation is wrong.

President jokes about taking the 5th

From Raw Story

Bush admits declassifying Iraq intelligence after question from student, not reporter
RAW STORY
Published: Monday April 10, 2006

President Bush, who admitted Monday to declassifying an Iraq intelligence report that was later leaked to the New York Times by Vice President Dick Cheney's then-chief of staff I. Lewis Libby, informed the American public of his declassification order after a question from a student, not a reporter. Of note: White House reporters asked White House press secretary Scott McClellan no questions about the leak the first day after it was reported. Bush spoke today at the The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, at The Johns Hopkins University in Washington D.C.

In fairness, one White House reporter told RAW STORY that they hadn't had opportunities to ask questions of Bush directly, and that the morning of the McClellan press briefings the wires had not moved a story about the leak until around the time the press conference began on Air Force One.

STUDENT: First let me say thank you very much for being here. And thank you for taking questions. I know we appreciate that. My name is Ben Dearing (sp). I'm a second-year Masters student studying international energy policy.

PRESIDENT BUSH: International -- ?

Q Energy policy.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Oh, good!

Q Sorry. (Laughter.) My question, sir, is -- well, as Anthony eluded to earlier, and as you're aware, we have many students at SAIS who are currently working for or considering working for the State Department, the various intelligence agencies, and such. And how do you respond to the recent report by Prosecutor Fitzgerald that there is, in his words, "evidence of a concerted effort by the White House to punish Joseph Wilson," who himself has a distinguished record of government service.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah. No. I -- this is -- there's an ongoing legal proceeding which precludes me from talking a lot about the case. There's also an ongoing investigation that's a serious investigation. I will say this, that after we liberated Iraq, there was questions in people's minds about, you know -- about the basis on which I made the statements, in other words going into Iraq. And so I decided to declassify the NIE for a reason. I wanted to see people -- people to see what some of those statements were based on. That's what I wanted to see. I wanted people to see the truth. And I thought it made sense for people to see the truth, and that's why I declassified the document.

...And I felt I could do so without jeopardizing, you know, ongoing intelligence matters, and so I did. And as far as the rest of the case goes, you're just going to have let Mr. Fitzgerald complete his case, and I hope you understand that. It's a serious legal matter that we've got to be careful in making public statements about it. (Chuckles.)

Yeah? Please.

Phone-Jamming?

From Yahoo News

Phone-Jamming Records Point to White House
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer
Mon Apr 10, 4:55 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Key figures in a phone-jamming scheme designed to keep New Hampshire Democrats from voting in 2002 had regular contact with the White House and Republican Party as the plan was unfolding, phone records introduced in criminal court show.

The records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 — as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down.

The national Republican Party, which paid millions in legal bills to defend Tobin, says the contacts involved routine election business and that it was "preposterous" to suggest the calls involved phone jamming.

The Justice Department has secured three convictions in the case but hasn't accused any White House or national Republican officials of wrongdoing, nor made any allegations suggesting party officials outside New Hampshire were involved. The phone records of calls to the White House were exhibits in Tobin's trial but prosecutors did not make them part of their case.

Democrats plan to ask a federal judge Tuesday to order GOP and White House officials to answer questions about the phone jamming in a civil lawsuit alleging voter fraud.

Repeated hang-up calls that jammed telephone lines at a Democratic get-out-the-vote center occurred in a Senate race in which Republican John Sununu defeated Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, 51 percent to 46 percent, on Nov. 5, 2002.

Besides the conviction of Tobin, the Republicans' New England regional director, prosecutors negotiated two plea bargains: one with a New Hampshire Republican Party official and another with the owner of a telemarketing firm involved in the scheme. The owner of the subcontractor firm whose employees made the hang-up calls is under indictment.

The phone records show that most calls to the White House were from Tobin, who became
President Bush' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> President Bush's presidential campaign chairman for the New England region in 2004. Other calls from New Hampshire senatorial campaign offices to the White House could have been made by a number of people.

A GOP campaign consultant in 2002, Jayne Millerick, made a 17-minute call to the White House on Election Day, but said in an interview she did not recall the subject. Millerick, who later became the New Hampshire GOP chairwoman, said in an interview she did not learn of the jamming until after the election.

A Democratic analysis of phone records introduced at Tobin's criminal trial show he made 115 outgoing calls — mostly to the same number in the White House political affairs office — between Sept. 17 and Nov. 22, 2002. Two dozen of the calls were made from 9:28 a.m. the day before the election through 2:17 a.m. the night after the voting.

There also were other calls between Republican officials during the period that the scheme was hatched and canceled.

Prosecutors did not need the White House calls to convict Tobin and negotiate the two guilty pleas.

Whatever the reason for not using the White House records, prosecutors "tried a very narrow case," said Paul Twomey, who represented the Democratic Party in the criminal and civil cases. The Justice Department did not say why the White House records were not used.

The Democrats said in their civil case motion that they were entitled to know the purpose of the calls to government offices "at the time of the planning and implementation of the phone-jamming conspiracy ... and the timing of the phone calls made by Mr. Tobin on Election Day."
While national Republican officials have said they deplore such operations, the
Republican National Committee' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Republican National Committee said it paid for Tobin's defense because he is a longtime supporter and told officials he had committed no crime.

By Nov. 4, 2002, the Monday before the election, an Idaho firm was hired to make the hang-up calls. The Republican state chairman at the time, John Dowd, said in an interview he learned of the scheme that day and tried to stop it.

Dowd, who blamed an aide for devising the scheme without his knowledge, contended that the jamming began on Election Day despite his efforts. A police report confirmed the Manchester Professional Fire Fighters Association reported the hang-up calls began about 7:15 a.m. and continued for about two hours. The association was offering rides to the polls.

Virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number, which currently rings inside the political affairs office. In 2002, White House political affairs was led by now-RNC chairman Ken Mehlman. The White House declined to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002.

"As policy, we don't discuss ongoing legal proceedings within the courts," White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said.

Robert Kelner, a Washington lawyer representing the Republican National Committee in the civil litigation, said there was no connection between the phone jamming operation and the calls to the White House and party officials.

"On Election Day, as anybody involved in politics knows, there's a tremendous volume of calls between political operatives in the field and political operatives in Washington," Kelner said.
"If all you're pointing out is calls between Republican National Committee regional political officials and the White House political office on Election Day, you're pointing out nothing that hasn't been true on every Election Day," he said.

Dejavu?

Dems call for Bush to 'come clean,' cite 8 denials
RAW STORY
Published: Thursday April 6, 2006

After today's claim by Ex-VP chief of staff "Scooter" Libby that he was led to believe the President had approved the leak of classified information to reporters, Democrats have called for the President to set the record straight about his alleged involvement.

"President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid in a brief statement. "It's time for the President to come clean about his involvement in the leak case."

The statement was accompanied by eight of the numerous instances in which Bush or his spokesman, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, denied the President had knowledge of the leak.

That incidents identified by Democrats follow:

President Bush, 9/30/03:
"I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action."

President Bush, 9/30/03:
"If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. . . . I have told our administration, people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business."

President Bush, 10/28/03:
"I'd like to know if somebody in my White House did leak sensitive information."

President Bush, 6/10/04:
Reporter: "Do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?"
President Bush: "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts."

President Bush, 10/28/03:
"I want to know the truth. ... I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers."

President Bush, 7/18/05 issue of USA Today:
"If someone committed crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

White House Press Secretary, 9/29/03:
"The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

White House Press Secretary, 10/7/03:
"Let me answer what the President has said. I speak for the President and I'll talk to you about what he wants . . .If someone leaked classified information, the President wants to know. If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business."

The WH smeared Wilson? surprise, surprise...

Evidence Suggests White House Conspiracy
By Jason Leopold t r u t h o u t Report
Thursday 06 April 2006

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald stated in a court filing late Wednesday in the CIA leak case that his investigators have obtained evidence during the course of the two-year-old probe that proves "multiple" White House officials conspired to discredit former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a critic of the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence.

This is the first time the special counsel has acknowledged that White House officials are alleged to have engaged in a coordinated effort to undercut the former ambassador's credibility by disseminating classified intelligence information that would have contradicted Wilson's public statements.

Fitzgerald's court filing was made in response to attorneys representing I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, who was indicted on five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying to investigators related to his role in the leak. The attorneys are desperately trying to obtain evidence from the government that will prove Libby did not intentionally lie to the grand jury when he was asked how he found out about Plame Wilson and whether he shared that information with the media.

Furthermore, Libby's attorneys have argued that they are entitled to the evidence in order to prove Libby was not engaged in a "plot" to discredit Wilson. However, Fitzgerald says the evidence he has obtained proves there was a coordinated effort by White House officials to discredit Wilson.

Fitzgerald wrote in the filing, "There exist documents, some of which have been provided to defendant and there were conversations in which defendant participated, that reveal a strong desire by many, including multiple people in the White House, to repudiate Mr. Wilson before and after July 14, 2003."

Complete article here

Note to DeLay supporters: He dropped out... Doh!

Updated: 06:42 AM EDT
DeLay Supporters Crash Democrat's Event
By JUAN A. LOZANO, AP

SUGAR LAND, Texas (April 7) - Supporters of U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay protested at an event Thursday held by the Democratic candidate for the congressman's seat, and the event quickly dissolved into a shouting and shoving match. Police were called, but made no arrests.

"I got pushed. I got hit. I got a sign wadded up in my face and my hat pulled down over my eyes," said Marsha Rovai, 69, a supporter of Nick Lampson. "They just did it to be nasty."
DeLay campaign manager Chris Homan said he organized the protest but DeLay, a Republican, didn't know about it.

"Mr. Lampson is going to have to get used to being confronted about his voting record the next seven months," Homan said.

DeLay, who is under indictment on campaign finance charges, announced this week that he will resign from Congress sometime before mid-June.

At the news conference, Lampson called on the governor to set a May 13 special election so the district would be represented after DeLay leaves.

But moments after the event began in DeLay's home town, Lampson and his supporters were surrounded by protesters who held up hand-written signs. Lampson was silenced by their chanting.

Republican Gov. Rick Perry later said that, unless DeLay offers him his resignation letter by the end of the week, the seat would not be filled until the November general election. The election of a Democrat now could give the Democratic Party a leg up in November.

Lampson represented an adjacent district for eight years until DeLay-engineered redistricting cost him re-election in 2004. He said the protest was nothing new.

04-07-06 00:33 EDT

Frist Funny

Frist's Southern Hospitality

By Al Kamen
Friday, April 7, 2006; A17

It was with some trepidation that we opened a most interesting card, which announced on a blue-jeaned cowboy's belt buckle something called the "5th Annual VOLPAC '06 Weekend" in Nashville on April 21-23.

Problem was you had to unbuckle the cowboy's pants and look inside to see what this was all about. Seemed a bit too "Brokeback Mountain."

Imagine our relief to find only that we were "cordially invited" to the event honoring Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and "Mrs. Bill Frist, M.D." This is Frist's political action committee to raise money for other senators, making friends and positioning him nicely for his 2008 presidential bid.

Big-time donors can golf, ride bikes, tour a recording studio and have lunch at the Frist Center for the Visual Arts. Then, after a cozy cocktail reception, there's Saturday night at the Grand Ole Opry and breakfast at the lovely Hermitage Hotel on Sunday morning.

"Don't miss a celebration of southern hospitality," the invite says, "one-of-a-kind music and special friends . . ." though it's unclear who those friends are and what makes them special.
The back of the card shows the cowboy from behind with a red flowered handkerchief sticking out of his right pocket. Wait a minute -- wasn't there something about how this used to be some kind of code in the gay community years ago? A way to signal each other in crowded, noisy bars?

So we checked the GayCityUSA.com's Hanky Codes. Sure enough, there it was in the chart explaining what they mean: red hanky in right pocket. Oh, dear.

From The Washington Post.

Cuntler commits voter fraud... precious!

PAPER: Ann Coulter Given 30 Days to Explain Vote Fraud Felony Allegation!

Brad Blog April 1 2006

You'll recall that in February the Palm Beach Post reported that "conservative" extremist Ann Coulter may have committed a vote fraud felony by signing someone else's address to her registration form in Florida and then voting in the wrong precinct -- a crime which, if convicted, could earn her three years behind bars.

(It's been pointed out to us that such bars would have to be very close together to keep her from simply slithering through them to escape...Though even at that, we're not sure there is steel strong enough to keep her from being able to chew her way to freedom. But we digress.)
A few days after the story originally broke, Coulter claimed publicly she didn't even live in Palm Beach where she reportedly committed the crime. The Post reporter who broke the story, Jose Lambiet, quickly replied that he had hard evidence that she does, in fact, live in Palm Beach (next door to town councilman Bill Brooks on Seabreeze Ave.) and he characterized Coulter's denial as "absolutely a bold-faced lie."

Yesterday the Palm Beach Post offered still more "skinny" on the latest in the Ann Coulter Voter Fraud Felony Scandal. Her denials about being a Palm Beach resident is about to be tested -- first by the Palm Beach County Election Supervisor Arthur Anderson, and then perhaps by the Florida State Attorney to whom the entire matter may be referred.

Coulter's now got 30 days to 'splain herself, according to Lambiet in the Post. Please read on...

Complete article is here