Nasty, Brutish & Short

Immigration Archives

From the "I wish I wrote it department..."

February 14, 2008 09:33 AM

...Iowahawk chimes in with:

Heere Bigynneth the Tale of the Asse-Hatte.

An Archbishop of Canterbury Tale

 

1  Whan in Februar, withe hise global warmynge

2  Midst unseasonabyl rain and stormynge

3  Gaia in hyr heat encourages

4  Englande folke to goon pilgrimages.

5  Frome everiches farme and shire

6  Frome London Towne and Lancanshire

7  The pilgryms toward Canterbury wended

8  Wyth fyve weke holiday leave extended

9  In hybryd Prius and Subaru

10  Off the Boughton Bypasse, east on M2.

11  Fouer and Twyntie theye came to seke

12  The Arche-Bishop, wyse and meke

13  Labouryte and hippye, Gaye and Greene

14  Anti-warre and libertyne

15  All sondry folke urbayne and progressyve

16  Vexed by Musselmans aggressyve.

17  Hie and thither to the Arche-Bishop's manse

18  The pilgryms ryde and fynde perchance

19  The hooly Bishop takynge tea

20  Whilste watching himselfe on BBC.

Read the whole thing.

They say everything's bigger in Texas

February 13, 2008 02:43 PM

I don't know why, I just love that photo.

HT to Tammy Bruce, who says "It's Miss Tijuana!"

Because the depressing news can't start early enough, here we have the signage that helped John Derbyshire figure out where to vote...

February 5, 2008 04:33 PM

Welcome to John McCain's dream world.

From The Corner, at NRO Online.

Did you know that if you break American law and are overseas, the feds believe they can just come kidnap you?

December 4, 2007 08:15 PM

Even if you're not an American citizen.  I had no idea.  From FoxNews:

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by U.S. authorities and could face criminal charges in America.

Until now it was commonly assumed that U.S. law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.

It dates back aways, folks, so don't blame Bush for some imaginary crack down on civil rights:

The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington.  Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

Wonderful news.  We can kidnap criminals from overseas and bring them here, but we can't won't send back the criminals who have come here just by walking over the boarder.  Lovely.

HT: The Llamas

So who did I think won?

November 29, 2007 09:16 AM

Nobody, hand's down.  Huckabee seems personable, but he's lost on the tax issues.  You can just tell he has an improper understanding of the role government is supposed to play. 

Ron Paul...right on the tax issues, but lost, lost, lost on foreign policy.  Why does he play ball with the whackadoos?  The only possible conclusion is that he's a wackadoo, too.  I'm glad he's on the stage though.

McCain's right on foreign policy, but I just can't get over all the crappy ideas he's had in the past about domestic policy.  Campaign finance.  Immigration.  And the way he continually implies that people who are opposed to illegal immigration are racist.  And he doesn't believe in torturing terrorists.  Ridiculous! 

Rudy did well, but came across as petty.  I think he was coached too much.  The attack on Romney for having a "sanctuary mansion" was just silly.  Toss the campaign worker who thought that would be a witty phrase.

As for Thompson?  What can I say?  He's still such a disappointment.  Where's the passion?  Where's the personality?  It's just emptiness.  He barely did one thing during the debate that was memorable.  No wait.  He didn't do ANYTHING during the debate that was memorable. 

So who does that leave?  In my mind, Romney who had the most well-rounded result.  He flubbed a few questions, but overall, the presentation works for me, and so do the policies.  He's personable, but firm.  I call Romney the winner.

I'm still undecided, though.

UPDATE: I accidentally deleted several comments.  I get several thousand spam ones a day, so sometimes accidents happen.  Sorry!

Yes, NBS is liveblogging the CNN Youtube Debate!

November 28, 2007 08:56 PM

Out comes The Coop.  He’s apparently the moderator.

The Chair of the Florida Republican Party is going to introduce people.   Oh no, his eyes are set to close together.

No wait, it’s going to be the Governor of Florida who introduces the candidates. Charlie Crist.  He’s absurdly tan.  Melanoma city!  Looks suspiciously like Anderson Cooper.

What’s next?

Photos.  Boring.  CNN’s talking heads are talking.  More boring than the photos!  Sub story of the night: Is CNN going to remotely pretend like they have their candidate on that stage?  Or not even bother?

So while they’re doing that… what do I think of the premise of this?  Asinine questions from the public?  I think it could be fun, and let the candidates show some personality.  Thank God we are past the days of having that boring PBS guy moderate the debates.  Who cares about him!   I want to see the snowman!

The first question: a gi-tar player from Washington.  Okay, he’s too long on the riff.

Fred Thompson—wrinkly.  Is that what the country needs right now?  McCain pretends to be entertained.  Awww they actually have the guitar player in the audience.  He’s embarrassed.  As he should be.

The first real question to Giuliani: sanctuary cities in NYC.  He supported it!  Giuliani says no, it wasn’t.  We sent them back if they committed crimes.  Oh wait, there were exceptions.  The kids got to go to school, and they have emergency care.  And they could report crimes.  Whoop dee dee.  He then talks about what he will do with illegals.  Too many ideas, too little time to type.

Romney: Yes it was a sanctuary city!  Mitt looks good.  Hair looks a tad dark though.  She didn’t get the mix right! 

Back to the G man: Mitt has the worst record.  He had a sanctuary mansion at his own home!  Illegals in Mitts own home.  Oh please, who cares.  Good help is hard to come by.

Mitt: you know better than that.  No illegals in my mansion!  They were illegals hired by my contractors.  I’m with Mitt on this one.  That does not a sanctuary mansion make.

G: Holier than though attitude from Mitt!  Again, an unfair attack.

Is anyone else running but Mitt and Rudy?  The Coop says we’ve got to run.  But Mitt and Rudy ARE the front runners, you know.

Next question: People want to come here LEGALLY.  But the Senate wants amnesty.  Will you veto any amnesty bill?  Thompson says he will.  Good for him.  Totally with him on legal immigration, I know someone from Peru who would make a great citizen, and she’s about go home because her visa’s done.  If she just flew to Mexico and walked in, she’d be fine.

Fred also wants us to know that Romney supported the Bush immigration bill.  And then he goes after Rudy, too.  We’ve all hired people and it’s been a bad decision.

Hey, what’s he saying, that Republicans have lots of house hold help?  Where’s my household help?  Roberto, martini.  STAT!

McCain: we never proposed amnesty.  That’s basically a lie.  Boo!  He says we need people to pick the cotton (in not so few words).  We have learned the people want the borders enforced.  Why did they have to learn that?

Immigrants are God’s children too, he says.   Implies that people who oppose illegal immigration are racist.  So double boo to McCain!

Next up: More on immigration.  We can’t run our business without our guest workers.  Oh what crap, questioners.  Pay your employees more, and raise your prices. Why should you get labor on the cheap?

Tancredo: Says what I just said.  But was nicer. 

Hunter: He built the border fence in San Diego!  But, not himself, it would appear.  Crime went down 53%. 

Going to get Henry a frosty paws while these non-tier people are talking.

Huckabee: I never gave favors to illegals as Governor of Arkansas!

Is this whole debate about immigration?  If Republicans want to win next fall, the debate will be then.  People are hot about this.

Romney: Huckabee reminds me of a liberal in Massachusetts.  Hits him on the taxpayer issue.  Huckabee is weak on that.  No favorable tax treatment for illegals. 

Huckabee: I had to pay my own way through.  I might have needed government support or I’d be picking lettuce.  Boo hiss!  He just lost me.

Romney: no tax funded benefits to illegal kids is better than what others get.  That’s the issue.

Next question: For Ron Paul: your supporters are conspiracy freaks!

Ron Paul:  Oh my God, he does talk about the Trilateral Commission.  There is a move for a North American Union.  It’s a conspiracy of ideas.  Whack.  Job.  Millions of acres in imminent domain taken for a highway to Mexico!  I’m with him on not liking the U.N.  But I think the other candidates are too.

Next question: the economy.  A co-ed wants to know about trillions spent on national debt.  Oh please.  This is not a concern of hers.

McCain: Republicans have forgotten about spending and greatly expanded government.  He’s right about that.  But what was he doing to stop it?  He saved us $2 mill on a bogus deal.  Big deal!

Romney: Every bill with pork must be vetoed.  And there must be fundamental change.  Go after the entitlements.  So I like Romney at this point.  But I’m not believing he’s going to veto every bill with pork in it.

Rudy: across the board cuts at every agency, like Reagan did.  That sounds great!  Bush should do this now.  Yes he should!

Next question: limited government by reducing federal spending was what we used to believe.  What programs would you cut?

Fred: lots of ‘em.  But he doesn’t name a single one.  Reform Social Security and Medicare need reform.  But oh no, we’re not going to cut them.  Re-index the way benefits are calculated.  Not revolutionary enough.  By far.

Ron Paul: Washington didn’t change me.  He’s certainly right about that.  Cut Department of Education, Energy, Homeland Defense and foreign aid.  Amen.

Huckabee: Get rid of the IRS.  He claims he’s serious about this.  Revamp Homeland Security, it’s a mess. 

Question for McCain: Eliminate the federal income tax for a retail sales tax?  McCain says no.  Look carefully at it.  We need a commission, and do what we do with base closings.  Oh great.  That’s a wonderful way to de-politicize it.  Also: Paul’s brand of isolationism is what caused WWII.  Right about that.  Also, the troops don’t like you, Ron.

Paul: Why do I get the most $ from active duty personnel?  McCain doesn’t understand the difference between isolationism and non-intervention.  I believe in non-intervention.  I guess I don’t see much of a difference in that either.

Question: A no new tax pledge? Oh the question was from Grover Norquist.  I met him during my Human Events days.

Everyone signs on to the pledge but Thompson and McCain.  Paul has NEVER voted for a tax increase.  Impressive.

Question from a rude guy eating corn.  Why should we have farm subsidies?  A question for Iowans!  But I have to say, the Iowans are ridiculously greedy on this.  No farm subsidies!  Romney’s on the wrong side of this.  He wants to win in Iowa.  Boo.  Rudy agrees.  Boo, again.

Question for Rudy: he used expense accounts improperly as Mayor.  True or not?  Rudy: I had threats; I had nothing to do with the handling of security records.

All the campaigns have submitted videos.  They better be good.

Tancredo’s is bad.  He speaks poorly in his own video, with weird clips of Hillary.

Question: There is lead in our toys from China.  And we adopted a baby from China!  The kind of question I hate.  The one where the questioner is totally self-absorbed.

Tancredo: we need a new trade arrangement with China.

Hunter: China is cheating on trade, to buy planes and missiles.  Tells us to buy American.  I hate that line of thought too.   Make a competitive product and I’ll buy it. 

Fred’s vid: attacks the others as not conservative.  It’s a piss poor video, though.

Romney: I WAS WRONG ON ABORTION.  I was WRONG.  I changed my mind as Governor.  The first time it came to my desk, I came down on the side of life.  I am proud to be pro-life.  Satisfies me.

Huckabee:  I did too oppose taxes.  I am a fiscal conservative.

Finally, a break!

And we’re back.  Barely enough time to let Henry out and pour a glass of petite sirah.

I did miss some.  They’re talking about guns.  I would certainly hope they are all in agreement about this.  If not, they’re toast.

Question, tell us about your gun collection?  The Coop thinks the questioner is a freak.

Thompson: I have a lot of guns.  Won’t tell us where, though.  Witty, but sounds like a dodge

McCain, I know how to use one.  I don’t own one.  Weird.  But, if I had been tortured, maybe I wouldn’t keep guns around either.  Special dispensation on this for the previously tortured.

Booo.  Romney doesn’t own guns either.  It’s just McCain and Rudy who don’t

Next question: Black on black crime. 

Romney: We need moms and dads.  He’s right, there’s been a total collapse of the family structure in the African American community.  Cites Bill Cosby.  Civil rights issue of our time is the failure of inner city schools.  Great point.  Wish he’d followed up with school vouchers. 

Rudy: Romney has a mixed record on crime.  Rudy is on the attack.  Rudy says he has a strong record on crime.  True.  He took NYC from a very dangerous city to a very safe city. 

Romney gives him credit for that.  Says I was not a mayor, I was a governor.  Again, I agree with him on this.  Crime is a local issue.  Not a state issue, and certainly not a national way.  Say no to a nationalized criminal code!

Question on abortion: What if it becomes illegal?  Sweet cheeks, it’s not going to become illegal.  It would be a states issue and the public would get to decide through the political process.  You have nothing to fear.  Paul understands this.

Thompson: Overturning Roe should be our No. 1 focus right now, and that pertains to judicial appointments.  Amen.  But I just don’t believe this would be his No. 1 priority.

Question: another question on Roe.  He says what would you do if Roe is reversed, and Congress imposes a federal ban, would you sign? 

Rudy says no, leave it to the states.  He’s right.

Romney: Overturn Roe.  I would be delighted to sign such a bill if it were the consensus.  But we are not there as a country.  Leave it to the states.

Question: the death penalty: what would Jesus do?  A good question!

Huckabee:  I’ve done it as Governor, the others haven’t.  He took it very serious and sincerely, it seems.  There is a place for the death penalty, he says.

He avoids the theological question about where Jesus would be on the death penalty.

Coop asks the question again.

Huckabee: Jesus was too smart for to ever run for public office.  Good response.  I wouldn’t answer that question either.

Question: Do you believe every word of the Bible.  Specifically.  Weird questioner.  An attack on Romney’s Mormonism?

Rudy gives an intelligent, thoughtful response, and seems to have a sound theological understanding.

Romney: The Bible is the word of God.  I believe in the world of God.  I may interpret differently.  He’s off his footing here.

Huckabee: It is the word of revelation to us from God himself.  Quotes a few of the greatest hits.  Let’s work on Love Your Neighbor first.  No one is ever going to understand all of it.

Romney’s vid.  Hits on the big conservative points.  Looks professional.  Good spot.  But not a typical youtube video.

Break and we’re back.

Rudy’s video: Funny.  Youtube like.  Best one of the night!

Question: a Muslim lady from Alabama.  What would you do to repair the image of America in the Muslim world?  Please, this chick is not a Republican primary voter.

Rudy: Be tough on terror.  He refused to get sucked in by the premise of the question.  Excellent, excellent response.

McCain: Continue the surge.  Reconstruct Iraq.  Fight the Democrats on a date for withdrawal.  Criticizes Rumsfeld’s strategy.  But we’d be worse off under the Democrats’ strategy, though, he says.

Question: Waterboarding.  Do you support it?

Romney: The President should not limit our interrogation tactics.  Does not seem to have a big problem with it.  Interrogate terrorists.

McCain: He’s totally opposed to waterboarding and torture.  I know his background on this, and I know he was tortured.  But still.  I just don’t have a problem with torturing terrorists.  He’s very passionate about this.

Romney: I am not in favor of torture, but I am not going to pick what is and is not torture.  I will let the counter terrorism experts make that decision. 

McCain: They you have to advocate that we withdrawal from the Geneva Conventions.  And why, really, shouldn’t we?  We’re basically the only ones who honor it.  McCain, still very opposed to torture.  Life is not “24” he says.  But maybe if it were, we wouldn’t have to strip search grandmothers at airports.

Question: We should stay in Iraq long-term.  Who supports that idea?  Thompson: don’t stay forever, but for as long as it takes. 

Paul: Give them their country back.  The surge hasn’t worked.  They’re ready to be the next Vietnam.  He’s pretty ignorant, if you ask me.

McCain: we never lost a battle in Vietnam; American public opinion lost that war.  Terrorists want Iraq to be a base to attack the U.S.

He gets booed.  He’s totally right, though.  Why don’t want people want to hear the truth about this?

Paul: It is irrelevant that we never lost one battle in Vietnam.  The only reason they hate us is because we have bases in the Mideast.  So clueless!

Screams and boos for him, now.

Tancredo: We are living in a world where we are threatened by radical Islam.

Question for Rudy: You’re using 9/11 to propel yourself into the White House.  True?  Rudy: Look at my whole record.  And then he goes on.  And on. 

God, this is a long debate.  This may be the last NBS live blog, ever. 

Next: Stupid question about Vice President Cheney.  Why are people so paranoid about Dick Cheney?  The only thing wrong with Dick Cheney is he’s not running for president.  Anyway, the question:  How much authority will you give your VP?

Thompson: VP needs to be ready to assume the office, if necessary.  Brings up judges again.  Why is he bringing this up so much?  It just seems so insincere. 

McCain: Bush had to rely on Cheney’s foreign policy expertise, because that was Cheney’s area and we were at war.  I would not have to do that.

Hunter’s vid: It’s another commercial.  And it looks cheap.  Looks like he’s running for Congress, not President. 

Another break.  Have a Holly Jolly Christmas, and go to Playhouse in the Park to see Scrooge!

Question: A gay veteran wants to know what the problem is with gays in the military.

Tancredo: Blows the answer.  Young enlistees are conservative Christians, and it would be unfair to them.

Huckabee: Conduct could put at risk morale, and cohesion.

Romney: The Coop points out a Romney flip flop on this.  Romney: This is not a time to change don’t ask, don’t tell.  Let the military decide this issue.  Romney kind of flubs this.

The veteran says he didn’t get an answer.  But he did!  He just didn’t get the answer that he wanted.  The Coop gives the veteran a long leash to go on and on about gays in the military.  Gee, I wonder why?

McCain:  Thanks for your service, but all the military people I talk to say don’t ask, don’t tell is working.

Next: Should gay Republicans support you?

Huckabee: Gives a funny answer.  Hey, I’ll take their support.  But I won’t change my mind on same sex marriage.  Perfect response.  Respectful.  Kind.  Firm.

Next up?  Boring question about social security from a young person.  Start saving now, young person,” is just about the only honest answer.  Let’s see if we get it.

Thompson’s response is so boring I miss it.

Romney: We can’t follow Hillary to the left, but follow the path Reagan blazed.  He certainly knows the talking points, doesn’t he?

Question: We need a man on mars!   What are you going to do for NASA?

Huckabee: Expand the space program.  And let’s put Hillary on the first rocket to mars.

Tancredo: No spending on crap like that!  Excellent response.  We can’t afford to go to mars!

Question: African Americans hold conservative views, but vote for Democrats.  Why don’t we vote for you?   I love this question.  The Republican Party’s failure to make this case is one of the tragedies of our time. 

Rudy: School choice, welfare reform.  We can be popular in African American Community.

Huckabee: African Americans vote for me.  I asked for their vote.  He then says he spends money on hypertension and diabetes, and they afflict African Americans more.  Again with the spending!

And on the opposite extreme: Do you support Confederate flags?

Romney:  With all the issues we face?  No.

Thompson: Not everyone with a confederate flag is racist.  But there is not a place for it in the public arena. 

Paul’s video: Very populist.  Very isolationist.  Not bad as a matter of form.

Question: We need new infrastructure, and it’s going to be expensive.  Let me guess?  Huckabee will pay for it.

Rudy: We need a sustained program and long term planning.

Paul: We are taxed to blow up bridges overseas and our own bridges are falling down. 

McCain: I will veto all pork. 

Rudy: Blows it by saying he opposed the line item veto and (apparently?) took Clinton to court on this.

Question: Will you run as an independent, Ron Paul, if you don’t get the nomination?  He says no!  I think. 

Last question.  THANK GOD.  For Rudy: You are a life long Yankees fan, but still supported the Sox in the post-season.  Rudy says he is an American League fan.  Boo hiss!  He almost ends on a weak note, but then has a good joke about how many times the Yankees won the World Series when he was Mayor. 

Romney:  My family hates the Yankees.  He wasn't going to win New York anyway. 

And that’s it.  Romney’s got my vote. 

More substantive thoughts later.  I'm taking Henry outside.

UPDATE: I accidentally deleted several comments.  I get several thousand spam ones a day, so sometimes accidents happen.  Sorry!

From the "Making NBS Seem Mainstream" Department

July 16, 2007 09:26 PM

Last week I introduced you all to someone who is even more conservative than I, this week, I give you someone more snobby.  Do check out the writings of one Rafal Heydel-Mankoo, and his blog, Reflections of a Young Fogey.  Mr. Heydel-Mankoo is an historian, honours consultant, protocol and etiquette consultant, and a royal and political commentator.  He is also the editor of Burke's Peerage & Gentry, and the grandson of Polish aristocrats Baron Adam Heydel and HSH Princess Karolina-Katarzyna Jablonowska. 

He also appears to be about 30, thus making him rather young to have devoted a career to monitoring other people's breeding.  I'm a Colonial Warrior, but I don't try to make a living off of it.  It would be fun to have him at a Warrior's event, though--mostly because he's significantly under the average age of 70, and also because he probably doesn't approve of Colonials Who Are Warriors.  A monarchist could really stir things up.  One gets the sense from reading his blog that he is definitely peeved we won the Revolutionary War.

Here's a sample:

Monarchists, traditionalists and historians gathered en masse yesterday evening in the dignified surroundings of London's Travellers Club library to honour the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660; thus marking the end of 11 years of hated, puritanical republican dictatorship. The Royal Stuart Society organises this splendid annual dinner on or around Oak Apple Day, May 29th, King Charles II's birthday and the date of his triumphal entry into London.

He then goes into a lengthy discussion of The Royal Stuart Society, and its aims:

The Society gladly recognises that those who form its membership are likely to have a varied range of particular interests. For some it will primarily be support for the institution of monarchy and the upholding of monarchical institutions against attack from their opponents. This support may favour, for instance, the legitimist stance based on hereditary principles and exemplified in the Jacobite movement and tradition after 1688. Adherents of this position will look with favour on the senior and direct hereditary heirs of the Royal House of Stuart although as our page on ‘Succession’ makes clear, none of those heirs has claimed any or all of the thrones of the British Isles since 1807. Other members of the Society will support or find acceptable the ‘parliamentary’ monarchy created by the Act of Settlement (1701) and now embodied in the reigning House of Windsor. For all there will be a consensus based on the desirability of having a monarchy rather than a republic. Closely linked with support for monarchy, members are likely to favour organised society in these islands being of a Christian, civilized and traditionalist nature. In a more general way they will favour co-operation with other credible monarchist bodies such as the International Monarchist League to support monarchical forms of government worldwide.

The Colonial Warriors have a rather different charter, but we do allow membership to descendants of those who fought for the Crown.  So we'd welcome members of The Royal Stuart Society to join our "hated, puritanical republican" brood.  Apparently, though, the feeling is not mutual.

But I do have something that Mr. Heydel-Mankoo and I surely do agree on.  True story: A few years ago, I was in the Henry VII Lady Chapel at Westminster Abbey, near the stone that reads "The Burial Place of Oliver Cromwell 1658-1661."  And hand to God, this obese tourist woman who was standing next to me exclaimed:

"Awwwwwwwww.  He only lived to be three years old!"

If we hadn't been in a Church, I would have just unloaded on that woman.  I'm trying to take in the surroundings, and then there's this idiot.  If you are that stupid, you need to keep your mouth shut.  Those were the years that he was interred her, you fool.  Oliver Cromwell was not a baby.  He was a brutal dictator who got dug up, hanged, and decapitated after the Restoration of the Monarchy.  Not a baby.

Anyway, I'd like to think Mr. Heydel-Mankoo and I would share a common disdain for stupid people.  And both of us would probably would like this photo:

It's the Henry VII Lady Chapel at Westminster Abbey, sans fat, ignorant tourists.

Immigration Aftermath

June 28, 2007 09:05 PM

So I guess I need to write about it, since I've said so much thus far.  I was in a CLE earlier today, so I missed all the excitement as it was happening.  And now it already seems like old news.

But anyway... Yes, I'm thrilled with the results, but I am still very annoyed with the President for putting all of us through this crap.  It was great to see conservatives rise up and drive a stake through the heart of this thing, but why should we have had to?  The effort it required was just ridiculous, and it was draining.  I do not understand why the President thought this was so important to propose, much less pursue so aggressively.  All that energy could have been directed to something productive.  So W's still on my shit list.

Also on my list?  George Voinovich of course.  Yes, in the end, he voted the right way.  But what's with all the coyness?  Why wasn't he willing to say what his position was?  And then he indignantly declared on Sean Hannity's show that he would not be intimidated by all the, you know, citizens who were calling his office.  Well, at the end of the day, he was intimidated.  The whole thing just unbelievable, and I hope it will not soon be forgotten.

And why the hell were bloggers the only people who were willing to ask Senator Voinovich what his position was?  He clearly doesn't pay the blogosphere much heed, and while that's foolish, it's his prerogative.  But he wouldn't have ignored a call from a "real" reporter.  So why didn't they call?  Even if they got an evasive answer, that would have been worth reporting too.  So Ohio's mainstream media are also on my shit list.

Last on the list?  Senator Brownback.  I heard him speak when he was in town a few months ago, and I thought he did a terrific job.  Well if you haven't heard, he voted yes right at the very beginning, during the alphabetical vote, because he thought cloture was going to pass. Then, when it was clear it would not pass, he switched his vote to a "no."  He clearly thought he was acting in a way that would help his Presidential chances, but his political instincts were exactly the opposite of politically astute.  Strange.  Very strange.  And disappointing.  It's not like he won't be punished for it, though.  His presidential ambitions are over.

But the good news of the day is that now we can all move on.  But not forget.

Liveblogging Voinovich on Hannity

June 27, 2007 02:30 PM

[Scroll down, there are numerous updates]

Sean's back after the bottom of the hour break.  "Joining us now from the Great State of Ohio, Senator George Voinovich." 

Phone went dead, Voinovich sounds he doesn't know where he is.  Sean asks if he wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine.  Voinovich says he's for it, but doesn't even know what it is.  How embarrassing.  Does he follow the news at all? 

Hannity asks if he'll vote for cloture tomorrow, Voino hems, haws, and gasps, then says he owes the American people a vote for or against it.  He's trying not to say what he'll do.

Voiny then says they have important amendments to consider.  They talk about Senator Hutchinson's amendment, which he says is very important.  He voted for it, but then, HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW IF IT PASSED TODAY.  He voted for it, but he can't even remember if he voted with the majority.  He sounds massively confused.

He'll take all the amendments into consideration as they move on.  Yeah right.

Voinovich then says the reason we are in this mess is because we approved money for border security and didn't spend it (Hun?  Yeah right they didn't spend it!).  Again, he says he is going to weigh all of this, and not tell us today if he is for it or against it.

The Senator then says he has been threatened by people calling his office, telling him this is the end of his political career.  "YOU DO NOT INTIMIDATE GEORGE VOINOVICH" he yells.  It is the fault of talk radio, he says.  But then he says if you don't like how he votes, you should take it into consideration the next time he's up for re-election.  Sure will, Senator!

Then it gets a little crazy.  Voinovich tries to scream down Sean, and won't let the host talk.  Says current law stinks.  Hannity says: "No one is enforcing the current law!"

Hannity: "You can't even tell me you've read this bill."  Voinovich says he has read "most of the summaries on it."

Voinovich: "The border today is more secure today than it was three years ago."

Hannity: "These borders aren't anywhere near secure.  I've been there, I've seen them.  This bill has had no hearings, no analysis.  400,000 guest workers every year, eligible for permanent status.  Penalty is meager for those who won't respect our laws. Security measures are reduced from last year."  Hannity is talking facts and specifics.

Oh no!  Sean made the Senator very, very angry.  The Senator: "It's not worthy to talk to you.  I'm disappointed in you, I had more respect for you." 

Hannity: "Senator you had a chance.  I'll leave you for the whole hour.  Have you done a cost analysis on this?"

But clearly, the Senator doesn't know how much it will cost.  They talk past each other.

Voinovich says if they stay here, get a job, then they'll be able to get the social security.  What?  Where did that come from? 

The Senator: "If you count the number of minutes you've had, you got to talk more than I did."

Voinovich sounds like a three year old.  They argue more.

[I have to stop listening for a minute, because I am too angry.] 

Hannity: "Congress is rushing this through."  He still wants to know if they have done a cost analysis and what it will do to Medicare, social security, etc.  "What will it cost the American taxpayer?"

Voinovich does not know, says he is getting off the phone.

Hannity: "You're running away because you can't answer a question!"

Voinovich: "I'll be back when you can be rational."  He hangs up the phone.

All in all, an appalling spectacle.  The Senator acted like a spoiled, petulant child. 

UPDATE:  Hannity is going to re-run the entire interview during the last half hour of his show today.  That's 5:30 on 55KRC, if you're interested and local. 

In other coverage:

Keeler Political Report: It was a "trainwreck of an interview."  "Voinovich's attitude was truly unbelievable."

Laura's Musings: The Senator made "quite a disturbing spectacle of himself."

Paindealer: "We may have just heard the beginning of the end of Voinovich's political career on live radio."

Hot Air has the audio, and the comment thread over there is hilarious.  Michelle Malkin herself says " Good gawd. Keep talking, George. You’re the best help we have in killing the bill out there."

BizzyBlog: "I told myself, this is going downhill in a big hurry.  Did it ever."

Thespis Journal: "Voinovich appears to be totally lost!"

World Net Daily: "Voinovich self destructs on Hannity."

Weapons of Mass Destruction: "What a humiliating performance."  They have more, here.  My favorite? "Nasty Brutish and Short has a liveblogged "transcript" that just has to be entered in to the record as Prosecution's Exhibit Number One on why The Crying Man does NOT deserve to be re-elected."  Awww.  Shucks.

Interested Participant: "In the most egregious way, he has disrespected his constituency."

Wow.  In The Corner on National Review Online, Katherine Lopez posts a scathing review: "At least he didn't cry."  This is, of course, a reference to the time Senator Voinovich CRIED on the Senate floor over John Bolton's appointment as U.N. Ambassador.

Blogmeister USA: "Retirement might be a good option."

Presto Pundit: "Is your Senator as well informed as a radio talk show host?  If the topic is the Kennedy-Bush amnesty bill, the answer is very likely no."

Porkopolis is not happy either.

Right Angle Blog: "WOW!  Voinovich may have single-handedly killed the amnesty bill by embarrassing himself and Ohio today."  "By pure serendipity I happened to be listening when George Voinovich was on today. I was riveted! Like witnessing a horrible car wreck bursting into flames - you don't want to acknowledge the horror, but you can't turn away."

NixGuy: "The one where Voinovich pisses off the entire Ohio GOP blogosphere."

Snarky Bastards: "Maybe the most embarrassing media appearance I’ve ever heard from an office holder."

Sue Bob's Diary:  "Despite the fact that the man can’t answer the simplest questions about the bill, he condescends to his constituency and snivels about intimidation. Though he claims HE can’t be intimidated—he cowardly runs away from Hannity’s persistent—though reasonable—questions."

Thanks to Bizzyblog and Weapons of Mass Destruction for their help with some of the links.

RecepciĆ³n a Brutish repugnante y al cortocircuito!!!

June 26, 2007 01:02 PM

Or as our grandparents used to say "Welcome to Nasty, Brutish and Short."  And yes, the Immigration bill is back on track.  Thanks for nothing, Senator Voinovich, et al.

UPDATE: Senator Voinovich will be on Sean Hannity's radio show tomorrow afternoon.  To my knowlege, this will be the first time he has spoken to any member of the media about the immigration bill.  It will be interesting to see how he defends his position.

Supposedly Senator Voinovich is on the fence about the Immigration Bill

June 25, 2007 01:54 PM

Or at least, so says the well-respected Bizzyblog.  He was told by both Voinovich's D.C. office and the Cleveland office that the Senator has not made up his mind and is taking comments from constituents.

I find it hard to believe he'd do the right thing this time, since he wasn't willing to last time.  But who knows, maybe the calls and the polls are having an effect.  The number is (202) 224-3353, for what's that's worth.  More numbers available here.

UPDATE:  I actually was able to get through, after trying a few times earlier today.  I asked if the Senator had made up his mind about cloture, and the young woman said she "did not have a statement from the Senator."  I said "I know, I don't have a statement from him either, and I emailed him about this over a month ago."  Bottom line?  He's still trying to hide from us.  I said "please tell him we're smart enough to know that if he votes yes on cloture but then votes against the bill on the floor, he's still supporting the bill."  She said she would pass on the message.

Call him if you wish, I honestly don't know if he's even worth the effort.  Michelle Malkin has a list of who might be, here.

92% Say Boot Mitch McConnell from the Senate if he caves on immigration

June 22, 2007 08:03 AM

I know this is just an online poll, but the results are still pretty astounding:

For our Kentucky listeners, Sen. McConnell is on the White House's flip list for the Immigration Bill. If McConnell changes his vote, will his vote affect your vote in 2008?
Yes, Kick him out like Ohio did to Dewine
91.84 %

No, I still support Sen. McConnell

8.16 %

I love how they compare it to kicking him out "like Ohio did to Dewine," too.

Sherrod Brown: Illegal immigration is the fault of free trade

June 15, 2007 12:44 PM

His office emails me after I emailed them in opposition to the amnesty bill.  He writes:

Unless we fix the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and enforce our own labor laws, we will continue to debate how high the fence should be and how many agents should guard our border with no real solution in sight. In 1994, the U.S. signed NAFTA, which promised, among other things, to help create a thriving middle class in Mexico. At that time there were 3 million undocumented workers in the U.S.; today there are more than 11 million. In Mexico, 9 million more live in poverty than when NAFTA was enacted. NAFTA has failed the U.S. and Mexico. By creating an atmosphere where Mexican citizens feel they have no chance of a successful life in Mexico, these ill-conceived trade agreements increase the number of illegal immigrants coming into our country.

But remember when NAFTA was passed and the complaint against it from liberal Democrats like Sherrod Brown was that it would send American jobs south of the border?

Meanwhile, it has now been nearly a month since I emailed Voinovich about the immigration bill, and I've yet to hear anything back.  Of course that's not just me.  He's refused to make a statement to ANYONE explaining what his position on the immigration bill is.