blogresponder

Aussies Have The Right Idea On Terrorism

2007-07-08T07:56:00.000-05:00

I just ran across this piece on how Australia is coping with the threat of Islamic Fundamentalism and Terrorism.
The US & British governments should give it a try. But I won't hold my breath.

I'll be back

CC

Harry Reid Thinks The Illegals Are Already Americans

2007-06-06T11:25:00.000-05:00

So Harry Reid has just admitted, on his own website, that the current Scamnesty is intended exactly as has been described by those of us who respect the rule of law have been saying. It is intended to make the Illegals US citizens. That is the only reason for the legislation.
Towards the bottom of the piece below it is as plain as day: "...bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows,.."

Newsroom

June 4, 2007

Reid: In June, Democrats Will Continue To Fight To Change Course In Iraq

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada made the following remarks today on the floor of the U.S. Senate:

Over the Memorial Day recess, I attended a service at Southern Nevada Veterans’ Memorial Cemetery in Boulder City. I am grateful beyond words for the sacrifices of the men and women in uniform from Nevada and all across America. In this work period, we will continue to do everything we can to honor their sacrifice with a responsible end to the Iraq war.

During the recess week, I had the opportunity to visit with many Nevadans. The war was foremost on their minds. They also expressed concern on the burden of record high gas prices, and the need to reform our immigration laws. I assured them that those issues would be foremost in the work period ahead.

On the first day of the 110th Congress, Democrats introduced bills reflecting the ten priorities that America sent us here to address. Last Friday we concluded a seven week work period, and we have taken action on seven of those ten priorities:

We passed the toughest ethics and lobbying reform in our nation’s history.
We passed a much deserved and long overdue raise in the federal minimum wage for working people, which was signed into law last week.
We attempted to give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices, but this effort was filibustered by Republicans.
We passed the recommendations of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, after they had been pushed aside for years.
For the second year in a row, we voted to give the hope of stem cell research to millions of Americans who suffer, and will soon send that bill to the President.
We passed a balanced budget that restores fiscal discipline and puts the middle class first – cutting their taxes while increasing investment in education, veterans’ care and children’s health care.
And we began debate on the complex and crucial issue of immigration reform.
This week, we will vote on cloture and final passage of a comprehensive bill that will strengthen border security, bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows, and keep our economy strong. In the days ahead, we will work to improve the bill to protect and strengthen family ties while improving the structure of the temporary-worker program.

How much more proof do we need?

If you click the title bar of this piece, it will take you to Reid's website so you can see it for yourself. My guess is it will be pulled down soon, so go their quickly, before it disappears.

I'll be back

CC

Fund Raising For Fred

2007-06-06T10:27:00.001-05:00

Scroll down to find a link to donate to Fred Thompson's Presidential effort.
I can't figure out how to get it on the side bar below the links. So I had to put it at the bottom.

Latest Scamnesty Bill

2007-06-05T10:44:00.000-05:00

Here is a piece I wrote the other night:

Among my pet peeves with most of these amnesty bills, there are several issues that need to be addressed, that are not.
First, the building of such a short fence (400 miles?) Is not worth the money spent on it. The miles of unfenced border would need constant surveillance afterward. That would cost taxpayers dollars perpetually into the future, as border patrol agents would be needed to cover all the rest of the unfenced area. Hence, the fence/wall needs to cover the entire length of the US border with Mexico. If the situation warrants, a similar wall needs to be constructed on the North border with Canada, but that can wait until the Southern border is secured.
Second, the "Anchor Baby" issue is not addressed. Any child born inside the United States normally is automatically a citizen. That needs to be ended. Any child born inside the US to Illegal Infiltrators cannot be allowed automatic US citizenship.
Third, the penalties for hiring illegals are still not strong enough. If it is made a felony (Federal Offence) to hire illegals, with mandatory jail time for the owner/CEO of the hiring businesses, the Illegals will not so easily get a job. That will cause them to "self deport".
Fourth, the granting of any social services to Illegals needs to be immediately halted, as it is a drain on our tax base and infrastructure. This includes Education and Medical Care. In addition, it needs to be a crime to allow the housing of Illegals.
Fifth, all cities that do not help defend the US by enforcing Federal Immigration Law need to be sanctioned for this. As many cities have called themselves "Sanctuary Cities", this has not been the case up to now. The Mayors and City Councils of those cities need to be brought up on Federal charges, which would remove those individuals permanently from Public Office, as those individuals have all violated their oaths of office. Jail time is appropriate as well.
Additionally, the idea that sanctions against the Illegals somehow "violates their rights" is fictitious. The Illegals, as lawbreakers and non-citizens should be granted NO RIGHTS. They should not be allowed to sue the US government or US citizens for the actions of US those citizens or US officials, including any action performed by Border Patrol agents. As a follow-up to this, any agent or US citizens currently in jail or being sued by Illegals needs to be immediately returned to the safety of their homes and lost jobs, and fully exonerated from all of the charges levied against them to date.
The government of Mexico has allowed this invasion across their border into the US, and even encouraged it by assisting the Infiltrators with maps and information on how to get into the US and how to negotiate the US legal system. That being the case, the US needs to send a bill to Mexico for each and every illegal captured inside the US. The amount of the bill will be based on the egregiousness of the offences committed by the Infiltrator. The money to pay these bills can be taken out of the money the US pays to Mexico for the oil it buys from it.
Since the Illegals will no longer have any rights, the US government needs to send a bill to the ACLU, for all legal fees accrued to date in its efforts on behalf of the Illegals.
I don't believe any of the above items are in the current bill, and until they are, NO BILL passes the smell test for me.

I sent the above in an email to my Senators and my Congressman here in Iowa. Haven't heard from two of them. Senator Grassley did respond with an auto respose, which is the same as no response, I guess.

I'll be back

CC

Anti Infiltrator March Planned

2007-05-25T18:38:00.000-05:00

There is an anti Illegal Infiltrator march planned for this June. It is supposed to take place on June 14-15-16. Click the title of this piece to go to the website of the planners.
Sounds like a noble effort, just hope there is enough reponse. I plan to go to Des Moines on June 16 with my Mexican flag with the slashed red circle on top of it.

I'll be back

CC

Fred Barnes Is Lost On Illegals

2007-05-22T17:52:00.000-05:00

I'm watching FOX NEWS right now. It is the show called "Special Report With Britt Hume". Fred Barnes is one of the panelists. The opening subject was the latest ridiculous attempt by the Senate to fool the country into accepting the Illegal Infiltrators as OK. Amnesty, etc....You know the drill by now. Anyway, the panel was commenting on emails they had received from viewers based on the panel's discussion that occured yesterday about the latest immigration sellout.
So Fred Barnes, who pretends to be a Conservative, trys to claim that those who are against the latest immigration sellout bill are against ALL IMMIGRATION!!!!.
Hey Fred!!! If that were the case, wouldn't all those fine upstanding citizens have been lobbying Congress along those lines for years? Why are they just now "coming out of the woodwork" to state their Xenophobic (as you describe them) attitudes?
My take on it is, you are full of it, Fred. My best friend has a Mexican wife. As a matter of fact, she originally came to the US illegally. But the necessary paperwork was completed and the legal waiting time was adhered to. She is now a US citizen.
Hey Fred!! My friend and his wife DO NOT FAVOR ILLEGAL INFILTRATORS. They are in favor of loosening up the legal immigration rules to allow a more realistic number of immigrants to enter the US. But they ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL INFILTRATORS.
Your claim that the viewers and emailers who are against the latest Immigration Sellout Bill are against all immigration is specious.
Here is Chuck Grassley's (US Senator from Iowa) take on it. He emailed me personally about this issue, just today. He has what he calls his "Top 15 flaws with the latest Amnesty (yes, that's what Senator Grassley terms it, amnesty) Program. I will put up the email he sent me, and then add a couple that I believe were overlooked. Here is his email to me:

Dear Mr. C:
Greetings from Washington D.C.
The United States Senate is currently debating an immigration bill that includes an amnesty program for over 12 million illegal aliens who are in the United States. Today, I outlined the top 15 flaws with this amnesty program which is ripe for abuse and rotten for national security.
I voted for amnesty more than 20 years ago. I believed at the time that by giving illegal aliens blanket citizenship, we would solve the problem. I was wrong. We’ve now got at least 12 million people illegal aliens thumbing their nose at our laws. We found out that by rewarding illegality, we only get more illegality.
If the bill passes, the amnesty provisions would allow for illegal aliens to immediately apply for probationary status. If they are approved, the illegal alien would automatically receive a Social Security number and work authorization. In 1-2 years, once certain requirements are met by the federal government, the illegal alien can apply for a “Z” visa for himself, spouse, children and parents over the age of 65. At this point the illegal alien may legally remain in the United States while waiting for the current backlog of visa applications to be cleared. After the backlog is cleared, the illegal can apply for a greencard or renew his/her “Z” visa. For a chart outlining the amnesty process, visit my website: http://grassley.senate.gov .
Thank you for your continued support as we proceed with the immigration bill.
Sincerely,
Chuck Grassley
Your Senator

Senator Grassley’s Top 15 Flaws in the Amnesty Program:
· Probationary benefits not subject to the trigger – Probationary benefits, including work authorization, protection from removal, and a social security number are granted to illegal aliens immediately, even if the alien’s background check is not complete.
· Many criminal provisions may be waived – Numerous criminal provisions are waived for eligibility purposes. For example, an alien who falsely claims U.S. citizenship would be considered eligible for amnesty even though it’s a crime.
· Background checks taken too lightly – An illegal alien can apply for probationary status and a Z visa without thorough background checks. Immediately after the bill passes, the alien can apply for probationary legal status and receive a card even if the alien’s background check is not complete.
· Illegal aliens protected from removal – If an alien is in removal proceedings, or being detained, at the time of enactment, the alien can still apply for amnesty. Aliens who apply for amnesty cannot be detained or deported while their application is being processed, essentially giving them immunity from justice.
· Terrorists and criminals can apply for amnesty – The Secretary of Homeland Security is allowed to waive the grounds of ineligibility for those who have an outstanding administrative final order of removal, deportation or exclusion. Currently there are more than 637,000 alien absconders in the United States that have defied orders to leave.
· Taxes – Illegal aliens are required to provide the IRS information about tax payments only when applying for legal permanent residence, if that avenue is pursued. Illegal aliens can skirt the federal, state and local tax laws because its not a requirement to prove one has paid outstanding tax liabilities to get probationary or Z status.
· Limits eligibility to illegal aliens – Creates a Z nonimmigrant visa program for illegal aliens and illegal aliens only. No one else is eligible for this program, particularly those waiting their turn in line. Also, there’s no cap on the number of eligible participants.
· Indefinite renewal for Z nonimmigrant visas – Z nonimmigrant visas are valid for four years and may be renewed indefinitely. This is a disincentive for illegal aliens to pay the $4,000 penalty, touch-back to their home country, prove they’ve paid their taxes, or receive a medical exam.
· Health standards ignored – No medical exam or immunizations are needed to get a Z visa.
· No incentive to learn English – There is no English requirement to get a Z visa. Each Z nonimmigrant must only demonstrate "an attempt to gain an understanding of the English language" upon the first renewal of a Z visa. There are waivers for this requirement.
· Green card applicants not required to return to home country – Green card applications (only for heads of household, not dependents) must be filed in person outside the U.S. but not necessarily in the alien's country of origin. The alien can then reenter (same day) under a Z nonimmigrant visa because it serves as a valid travel document. There are exceptions for this requirement.
· Fines are False and Misleading – Not everyone is required to pay the $5,000 penalty. To get a Z visa, a principal alien (Z-1 or head of household) must pay a $1,000 penalty, a $500 penalty for each dependent, a processing fee, and a $500 state impact fee. Dependents must also pay a processing fee. To renew a Z nonimmigrant visa, each Z visa holder must pay a processing fee no greater than $1,500. To get a greencard, if the alien intends to pursue this route, a Z-1 nonimmigrant must pay a $4,000 penalty. Z-2 (parents and spouse) and Z-3 (children) aliens are only required to pay application fees.
· Fines won’t adequately pay for cost of amnesty – The bulk of the monetary fines are required at the end of the program. All fines may be paid in installments and waivers are available in extraordinary circumstances.
· Impact on state and local government – State impact money will be granted to states to provide services for non-citizens only, instead of providing services to all citizens impacted by the large number of illegal immigrants (school systems, health care services).
· Revocation of terrorist visas – Visas revoked on terrorism grounds would allow Z visa holders to remain in the United States and use the U.S. court system to appeal terrorism charges. The bill, including the amnesty program, does not address visa revocation for any visa holder.

Now here is what my opposition was. I agree with Senator Grassley. But I have a few more problems with the bill:

I oppose the Senate immigration deal. It still rewards the Infiltrators
for crossing into the US illegally. I have read nothing about the "anchor
babies" in this new deal. Any child born to illegals within US borders
should not receive US citizenship status. All costs related to Mexican
illegals should be passed along to the Mexican government. This includes
incarceration and social costs. This means US should send a bill to Mexico
for every illegal who is apprehended inside the US. The money can be
taken from the money that would go to payments for Mexico's oil. Local
governments who call themselves "sanctuary cities" should have all Federal
funds denied for their communities. In addition, the city councils and
mayors of such cities need to be arrested and imprisoned, for a minimum of
five years, with no possibility of parole. They need to be put into
lockups alongside the illegals they so greatly love. The fence should
travel the entire length of the border, not just 200 miles. In addition,
the fence should be able to be effective standing on its own, without the
need of extra agents to patrol it.

I'll be back

CC

Time To Put The Dems' Feet To The Fire

2007-04-29T06:39:00.002-05:00

There are a couple of guys who have established a new website to watch over the new majority in Congress. The Majority Accountability Projest is new, and the intent is to point out the stuff that's going on behind the scenes that the Dems don't want you to see. Click the title bar to check it out!

I'll be back

CC

Bill Maher On Guns/Iraq

2007-04-25T21:19:00.000-05:00

I am watching Bill Maher on HBO, and the commentary has run to the Cho killings at Virginia Tech. Bill admitted that he owns a gun, and doesn't want the Dems to take it away. But in his next sentence, he claims that the NRA wants people to have hollow point bullets and the right to own "Assault Rifles".
First, the NRA has stated that the hollow point bullets are not an issue.
Second, there is no such thing, (in reality) as an ASSAULT RIFLE. Anybody who can define what that is, is full of crap. The only thing different from "assault rifles" and the semi-automatic hunting rifles available to everybody throughout the country is the appearance of that weapon. Just because a weapon looks like it is a military weapon, it becomes an "assault rifle".
On Iraq, Bill has agreed with Harry Reid that the Iraq war is lost. Stupid is as stupid does.
There are numerous blogs that have pointed out that the soldiers in Iraq think that Reid (and Maher) should shut up.
Here is an excellent analysis of Reid's stupidity.
Senator Reid should at least be censured by the Senate. For the good of the country, he should resign.

I'll be back

CC

New Anti Terrorism Website

2007-04-08T15:12:00.000-05:00

I've been doing a lot of surfing around the net today. Click the title bar for another new website that exposes the linkage between CAIR and terrorism.
Cool site!!

I'll be back

CC

Recommended Website

2007-04-08T14:01:00.000-05:00

I just discovered another eye opening website on the Islamic threat. Click the title bar to go to The American Congress For Truth. Don't get the title wrong, however. The person who runs it is originally from Lebanon, and has a story to tell.

I'll be back

CC

The Lawless Protest Again

2007-04-08T08:30:00.000-05:00

In Los Angeles there appears to have been another outpouring of sympathy for the lawbreakers from South of the Border. Click the title bar for the report from BBC.com
Using terms like "unfair" and "people are so frustrated", the amnesty crowd was up in arms again, demanding citizenship for everybody. Just great. Let's give it to the Terrorists as well, while we are at it.
Who cares about the law? I care about the law. Illegally infitrating across the border is a crime. Unless that changes, these people should never be allowed to become citizens.
What is unfair about asking people to obey the law? Those of us who think this situation is a travesty are the ones who deserve to feel frustrated.

I'll be back

CC

Another Fred Thompson Link

2007-03-15T09:49:00.000-05:00

Here's another link to Senator Thompson's voting record.

I'll be back

CC

Fred Thompson's Voting Record

2007-03-15T09:33:00.000-05:00

I have found a link, here that gives a short overview of Mr Thompson's voting record while in the US Senate.
Check it out!

I'll be back

CC

Who's Fred Dalton Thompson?

2007-03-15T08:44:00.000-05:00

If you watch the NBC show Law & Order you know the face. You know the deeep voice, the straightforward, no nonsense character of the DA. The actor is Fred Dalton Thompson, former US Senator from Tennessee. Mr Thompson served two terms and then stepped down voluntarily to take up acting full time. He is the conservative candidate who has been missing from the scene for the Republican Party for quite some time now. (Sorry to Tom Tancredo).
I suggest that everybody who wants a real conservative; one who is pro life, pro 2nd Amendment, and against rewarding illegals for breaking US law, to take a look at Mr Thompson. He is considering running for President of the United States.
Apparently he appeared on FOX over the weekend, and a groundswell of support seems to be coming.
There is an online petition that will be sent to Mr Thompson, here.
If you are tired of the Dems in office (already), but don't care for the RINO candidates currently available for the GOP, click the link and vote!

I'll be back

CC

PS As more information becomes available, I will post it asap.

Another Clinton Lie

2007-03-12T07:37:00.000-05:00

The other day Hillary went to Selma, Alabama to get out the Black vote. She claimed she was affected deeply in high school by Martin Luther King, in a speech he gave.
Kind of strange how Dr. King's speech made Hillary be part of the Goldwater group in 1964. Read the piece from Bob Novak on Townhall.com. (Click the title bar for the link). It will be interesting to see if Barack Obama's people pick up on this.

I'll be back

CC

2nd Amendment Vindicated, 31 Years Late

2007-03-10T09:59:00.000-06:00

This Breitbart piece is welcome news to those who hold their 2nd Amendment rights to be sacred. The draconian anti gun laws of Washington, DC have finally been found to be in violation of the 2nd Amendment. Click the title bar as a link. Go
herefor the actual document in pdf format.

Here's a taste:

To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment
protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right
existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to
placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be
barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth
for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s
enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
intermittent enrollment in the militia.

I'll be back

CC

GOP Turncoats In House Vote

2007-02-17T16:24:00.000-06:00

Yesterday the US House of Representatives (I use the term loosely) gave basically a vote of no confidence to President Bush and his Iraq troops surge plan. Voting was mostly along party lines, with 17 Republicans (again I use that designation loosely) voting along with the Dems.
Click the link to visit the House website with the roll call vote listed. The GOP members are in standard type, with the Dems in italics.
Say what you want about the way the war has been run, but remember, the troops need to support of all of our citizens, including members of Congress.
Keep the names in mind when the next election rolls around.

I'll be back

CC

Dems Showing Their True Colors In Earmark Debate

2007-01-15T05:39:00.000-06:00

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has already become the target of GOP sponsored legislation as a result of possible conflicts of interest in lobbying done by his relatives.
Click the title bar and see how quickly the newly annointed have fallen.

I'll be back

CC

Israel To Bomb Iran?

2007-01-07T09:58:00.000-06:00

So Israel may be planning a preemptive nuclear strike on Iranian nuclear facilities in reports out of England. This is being reported on FOX NEWS this morning. In my mind, it is necessary.
But David Asman, the host of the show had this "expert" on who said it was a bad idea. The guy's name is PJ Crowley. Apparently he was an advisor to George Bush sometime in the past.
Anyway, Crowley says it is a bad idea for Israel to bomb Iran, because..get this..
"It would be an act of war". And even better, it would "destabilize the Middle East".
I'm not sure what rock this clown came out from under, but the last I checked, Iran has said it will destroy Israel. Those sound like fighting words to me. And it doesn't seem possible to destabilize an area of the world that is already about as unstable an area that exists.
He didn't even understand the idea that Israel may have released the information on purpose to get Iran to stop producing the bomb.
It's beyond me why FOX gets these morons on the air, especially since they are paid for their appearances.

I'll be back

CC

Help Fight The ACLU & Illegal Infiltrators

2006-12-30T07:30:00.000-06:00

The city of Hazelton, PA has enacted ordinances making it a crime to knowingly hire illegals, as well as several other similar laws. Click the title bar to go to their site. There you can read the ordinances and make a donation to help them fight the ACLU in its attempt to bully this town into submission.

I'll be back

CC

ISG Bipartisan? So What

2006-12-08T08:57:00.000-06:00

David Limbaugh has a fine piece (click the title bar) on why the Iraq Study Group's recommendations don't matter, and why the Dems will insist that they do.

Europe Shows Iran Who's Boss, Sort Of

2006-11-23T12:50:00.000-06:00

Click the title bar and read how Europe is dealing with the misdeeds of Iran's crazy government.
Too bad it's not about their nuclear ambitions.

I'll be back

CC

Dems Running From Kerry

2006-11-01T07:20:00.000-06:00

With John Kerry again suffering from Foot In Mouth Disease, an Iowa candidate for congress has asked the Senator to stay away from Iowa. Kerry made a comment in a speech telling members of the military that if they weren't educated, they would end up in Iraq. Kerry has further compounded the problem by refusing to apologize for it.
What's interesting to me about all this is that Kerry scored lower on his AFQT than Mr Bush did. They both entered the service at about the same time, so the tests were similar. The AFQT is the Armed Forces Qualifications Test, given to all who enter any branch of the military.
Kerry is taking on the role that President Bush has, that of a pariah in his own party.

I'll be back

CC

Alcoholics Rejoice!!

2006-10-31T18:27:00.002-06:00

Click the title bar and see what I'm spouting about. It's what the drinkers have long waited for. Destroy your liver, get another for another 40-50 years of boozing it up!
We live in a great world.

I'll be back

CC

NY Times Editor: Wiretaps OK After all

2006-10-23T17:38:00.000-05:00

OK, the NY Times guys finally decided that Bush is right about the wiretap stuff. Too bad they buried their "apology" down deep inside another piece that belied its real contents.
Sounds like when the politicians put an earmark on a major bill, hoping nobody will notice.
Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin for this info. Here are the actual words, or click he title bar to go to the NYT website. BTW, the website version will probably disappear soon. My guess is they won't even archive it. The words:

Since the job of public editor requires me to probe and question the published work and wisdom of Times journalists, there’s a special responsibility for me to acknowledge my own flawed assessments.

My July 2 column strongly supported The Times’s decision to publish its June 23 article on a once-secret banking-data surveillance program. After pondering for several months, I have decided I was off base. There were reasons to publish the controversial article, but they were slightly outweighed by two factors to which I gave too little emphasis. While it’s a close call now, as it was then, I don’t think the article should have been published.

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused. I had mentioned both as being part of “the most substantial argument against running the story,” but that reference was relegated to the bottom of my column.

The source of the data, as my column noted, was the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or Swift. That Belgium-based consortium said it had honored administrative subpoenas from the American government because it has a subsidiary in this country.

I haven’t found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal under United States laws. Although data-protection authorities in Europe have complained that the formerly secret program violated their rules on privacy, there have been no Times reports of legal action being taken. Data-protection rules are often stricter in Europe than in America, and have been a frequent source of friction.

Also, there still haven’t been any abuses of private data linked to the program, which apparently has continued to function. That, plus the legality issue, has left me wondering what harm actually was avoided when The Times and two other newspapers disclosed the program. The lack of appropriate oversight — to catch any abuses in the absence of media attention — was a key reason I originally supported publication. I think, however, that I gave it too much weight.

In addition, I became embarrassed by the how-secret-is-it issue, although that isn’t a cause of my altered conclusion. My original support for the article rested heavily on the fact that so many people already knew about the program that serious terrorists also must have been aware of it. But critical, and clever, readers were quick to point to a contradiction: the Times article and headline had both emphasized that a “secret” program was being exposed. (If one sentence down in the article had acknowledged that a number of people were probably aware of the program, both the newsroom and I would have been better able to address that wave of criticism.)

What kept me from seeing these matters more clearly earlier in what admittedly was a close call? I fear I allowed the vicious criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog and enduring faith in a free press — two traits that I warned readers about in my first column.

The other troubling part is that statement about vicious criticism from the Bush administration. It wasn't the administration, it was us bloggers who viciously bit the ankles of the NY Times.

I'll be back

CC