RWN is taking Good Friday off and will return on Monday. Until then, consider this an open thread, enjoy the retro posts below and the links in this post, and have a great Easter week-end!

Bare Knuckle Politics

BuzzMachine

Dawn Yang's Blog

Diary of a Carny (Some Bad Language)

Digg

Does It Do Any Good To Email High-Traffic Bloggers?

Dr. Helen

Euphoric Reality

Madville

Michael Fumento Goes Back To Fallujah

Uncensored (And Probably Fake) Video Of Muhammed On South Park Last Night

Transcended

Video: Newt Gingrich Explains How The Media Got His Comments About Iraq Wrong

Update #1: Yes, I'm on vacation, but today, via Something Awful (some bad language), I ran across the single greatest liberal website. EVER! I said, EVER!

It's called Dognooz and it's nothing but videos featuring an angry, middle-aged white guy signing/rapping about why he hates Republicans as he hits bongos/drums! You've got to see it, if only to check MC Howard Dean's (or whatever his name is) facial expressions!

If you're trying to decide which video to watch first, try "Democracy hacked." That's an entertaining one.

Have a great week-end!

*** Update #2 ***: Video: Happy Easter! The Easter Bunny Hates You (Some offensive links on the site)

About The Latest Burger King Commercial

Most. Emasculating. Product. Ever.

The 10 People I'd Least Like To Be Stuck On A Desert Island With

The Downing Street Memo & The Tin Foil Hatter's Tea Party

Sam Kinison: The Original South Park Republican

Movie Review: The Passion Of The Christ

RWN's Ann Coulter Interview #1

RWN's Ann Coulter Interview #2

RWN's Top 25 Favorite Ann Coulter Quotes (2004)

RWN's Favorite Quotes From Ann Coulter's 'How To Talk To A Liberal (If You Must)'

The Best Quotes From The Last Year Of Ann Coulter Columns (2005)

An Interview With Congressman Tom Tancredo

Answering 13 Frequently Asked Questions About Illegal Immigration

Attacking Illegal Immigration From The Left

Billboards And Bumper Stickers In Mexifornia

Explaining The Problem With A Guest Worker Program In Three Steps

An Interview With Mark Krikorian

Give Us American Citizenship And Then Get Out Of Our Country!

How To Turn The Illegal Immigration Issue Into A Huge Winner For The GOP In 2006

The Four Step Democratic Plan For Electoral Success Via Illegal Aliens

The Key To Getting Illegal Immigrants Out Of The United States

Who Do You Think The Republican Nominee Will Be In 2008?

Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select The Most & Least Desired 2008 Republican Nominee (2006 Edition)

The Conservative Case Against John McCain In 2008

An Interview With Sam Brownback

An Interview With Mike Huckabee, Governor Of Arkansas

An Interview With Newt Gingrich

Carlos Mencia, from the "Mind of Mencia," talked about illegal immigration in his opening monologue last night. With an assist from TiVo, I was able to transcribe some of the funnier bits. Enjoy!

Cause they're out there protesting and I heard this one lady, she got all mad.

(In a whiny voice) "I don't understand how come the American people are not treating us like Americans."

Um, Maybe it's the...flag you're holding! Mexico! Why would you hold a Mexican flag when you're trying to tell America that you love this country? That's like coming to my house, taking a (crap) on my table and saying, "What are you going to cook next?" Nothing!

..My dad's from Honduras and my mom's from Mexico and all they ever said was how beautiful Mexico is. What a paradise Honduras is. You know what I mean?

"...Mexico is better (than the United States)."

And I would be like, "Then why don't you go back?"

"Well, it's a very technical situation."

It's not a very technical situation. If you go back to Mexico, it's not like there's a border patrol on that side going,

"Hey hey, where are joo going?"

...There's not even any Mexicans left over there. Have you been to Mexico lately? ...Everyone is from Guatemala and El Salvador there. It's like all the Mexicans came here, then there was nothing there, and they were like, "Well, let's move up a little bit."

*** Update #1 ***: You can see the video of this segment here. Go down to season 2 and click on Immigration.

On the subject of headlines and buried ledes, just imagine that your local newspaper, read by everyone you know, wrote a story saying that you were accused of some horrible act – let’s say rape for the men, child beating for the women. Imagine that the headline and opening dozen paragraphs of the story herald the accusations made against you. Then in the thirteenth paragraph of the story they say that DNA tests have cleared you of the rape (for the men) or that an investigation had found no evidence of child abuse (for the women). Let’s say that your local television news picks up the story, and reports the accusations, but doesn’t bother to report the DNA or investigation results. That is what George Bush must feel like every day. -- Lorie Byrd at Polipundit

Reference

People may not be ready for a Chatty Cathy for President, but Democrats are all but convinced voters won't be able to pass up Mattel's new Hillary Says AnythingTalking Doll in 2008!

Do you want a President with a firm stand on immigration? Great. Which stand would you prefer? Just pull the string to the Right and you get: Feb 2003: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants."

Doesn't sound good? No problemo, compadre ... just pull the string to the Left for this little bit of wisdom: April 10, 2006: "Thank you for your contributions to this country."

Is your country contemplating granting clemency, perhaps to a murdering horde like a bunch of FALN terrorists? Mattel's Hillary Says Anything Doll has you covered:

Seeking to ingratiate herself to Puerto Rican voters during her New York Senate campaign, Hillary first said she supported clemency for the FALN terrorists, provided they renounced violence.

But when a public backlash ensued against Bill's clemency offer, Hillary publicly called upon him to "immediately withdraw" his offer.

Yes, folks ... the secret is all in the strings. Is war a possibility in your nation's future? Pull the string to the Right and listen to Hilly-hawk vote for war and support the troops. And if things don't go as planned? Relax. Just pull the string to the Left for invective and constant criticism of the war effort, while the Right string continues to support the troops, of course. Even if she doesn't care for those unsightly military types prowling around the White House grounds.

Want an honest Prez? Hillary Says Anything is it. Just pull the Left string and listen to your potential President deride the the culture of corruption that is the sitting administration and just forget about all that that crazy campaign finance fraud. Heck, it was Hollywood - it was the accountants, stoopid!

Maybe you care about things like integrity, morals and family values. Well, Hillary Says Anything does too. Faced with a cavorting mate, Hillary Says Anything is a regular gal who simply stands by her man.. Okay, maybe she doesn't bake cookies and have teas, but no one is perfect. But just let one of those degenerate, husband stealing ho's ever have the audacity to speak out, ...just flip the string and little miss morality will see to it that crack Democrat operatives rip her lungs out in full public view. Face it, family values don't come any more dedicated than that, now do they?

Come on, folks! Don't tax yourself with trying to decide whether to vote Republican or Democrat in 2008. With Hillary Says Anything, you cast one vote and you get both.

Okay, maybe with Hillary Says Anything as President there are some strings attached - like higher taxes, a weakened military, nationalized health care and a Marxist at heart. But, hey, with Hillary Says Anything, between all the strings and her appointing Supreme Court Justices, at least you know you'll always have unrestricted, especially by that silly late term abortion nonsense, choice!

This content was used with the permission of Riehl World View.

"A large portion of the conservative base is angry about government spending and illegal immigration. They were willing to compromise -- for a while -- in order to get Bush back in. The days of compromising on these subjects are largely over which will make for particularly nasty fights on the Hill." -- John Hawkins, November 17, 2004

Question: "Now that Republicans have firm control of the Executive and Legislative branches of government, what, in your estimation, would be the biggest threat to GOP unity in the halls of power in Washington, DC?" -- huckupchuck

Answer: Illegal immigration and spending, illegal immigration and spending, and illegal immigration and spending. The base feels very strongly about both of these issues and quite frankly, George Bush is a big government Republican who believes in coddling illegal immigrants.

Things almost came to a head over these issues early in 2004, but because of the election, the party managed to hold things together. But, now that Bush is out of danger? A lot of Republicans in Washington are going to be willing to fight him on these issues and the base will be cheering THEM, not Bush, for doing it." -- John Hawkins, November 12, 2004

"But if you Republicans in Washington want to keep the base happy through 2006, three things are going to have to change.

1) You're going to have to get spending under control.
2) You need to stop increasing the size of government.
3) You better get a handle on illegal immigration.

Maybe George Bush is a "big government Republican," but the base is still full of Reagan conservatives who want to see budgets slashed, government weakened, and an end to the never ending stream of our tax dollars flowing out of Washington in the form of pork.

Nobody expects you to wipe the deficit out in a year or two, but let me tell you, the base has had enough of these highway bills, farm bills, Medicare prescription drug programs and other bloated, worthless, government spendfests that sound like they should be coming from the desk of Lyndon Johnson, not from a Republican administration with a Republican Congress.

I will also tell you that much of the base is boiling mad about illegal immigrants. We want the border locked down. We want to see business owners who hire large numbers of illegals doing the perp walk on TV as they're taken to jail. We don't want to see illegal aliens getting free college tuition, we want them slapped in handcuffs and sent back to where they came from.

We are a nation of laws and a lot of us are sick and tired of seeing criminals being rewarded for breaking our laws by sneaking across the borders. My guess is that the immigrants who followed the rules and became citizens here aren't particularly happy about it either, so is it really worth making a misguided attempt to pander to them at the price of infuriating your base? The party got by with it in 2004, but I don't think it's going to work again in 2006." -- John Hawkins, November 9, 2004

In all fairness, I didn't think things would get as bad as they are today, because at some point, I figured the political self-preservation instincts of the Republicans in Washington would kick in and they'd start making changes, if only to protect themselves. That has started happening in the House, but unfortunately, not in the Senate or the White House.

Here's a hint for all the Rockefeller Republicans in the Senate and Gerald Ford, Jr.'s in the White House: it doesn't matter how many Mexican flag-waving illegal aliens march in the streets demanding that they be allowed to break the law with impunity. Illegal aliens can't vote. On the other hand, your base does vote, and they're chewing up steel girders and spitting out nails over this issue. Moreover, according to Zogby, (who admittedly, you have to take with a grain of salt) your base opposes the McCain-Kennedy bill and the "compromise"/capitulation Republicans in the Senate almost signed onto, by an almost 6 to 1 margin.

"A majority of Americans said they oppose amnesty for illegals who already reside in this nation. While 52 percent said there should be no amnesty, 32 percent said they'd favor it.

The survey shows significant partisan divide on this question. Among Democrats nationwide, 51 percent favor amnesty, while 29 percent oppose it and another 20 percent said they are unsure. Among Republicans, just 13 percent said they favor amnesty, while 76 percent said they oppose such an offer. "

So, in an election year, when the Republicans are doing poorly, we have the GOP taking a position on a crucial, high profile issue that is wildly unpopular with the majority of the American people and about as popular as creating a, "We Hate Ronald Reagan," holiday with the base.

The Republicans in Washington are being sent a message here that might as well be in 50 foot high neon letters and it reads, "You can toe the line on illegal immigration or the voters will bury you under it at the ballot box in November." It's not too late for the GOP to save their jobs and a Republican majority in Congress, but they better take the hint.

Last night, South Park tried to show an image of Mohammed and it was censored by Comedy Central, presumably because it might prompt Muslim extremists to go on a murder spree. This is especially ironic, since Mohammed has already appeared in a South Park episode way back in 2001.

Want to see an image of Mohammed from the 2001 show? The sort of cartoon that could prompt protests, murders, suicide bombings, and lead to international incidents? Here you go:

I don't believe in gratuitously offending members of any of the world's great religions, including Islam, but there comes a time when you've got to stand up and refuse to be intimidated into silence

If we don't have the guts to post these cartoons here in the United States because we're afraid of extremist Muslims, how can we ask moderate Muslims living in the midst of these radical Islamists to stand up to them on other issues?

Last week, one of the characters on South Park said,

"Freedom of speech is at stake here, don't you all see? If anything, we should all make cartoons of Mohammed and show the terrorists and the extremists that we are all united in the belief that every person has a right to say what they want. Look people, it's been really easy for us to stand up for free speech lately. For the past few decades, we haven't had to risk anything to defend it. One of those times is right now. And if we aren't willing to risk what we have now, then we just believe in free speech, but won't defend it."

They were right and so was H.L. Mencken when he said:

"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."

Again, while we shouldn't try to gratuitously offend members of any of the world's great religions, the idea that non-Muslims should be required to adhere to the beliefs of the Muslim religion out of fear that some wacko will murder us if we don't is intolerable. Our ancestors did not come to this country, revolt against the British, create a Constitution, and tame a continent so that we, here in 2006, could cave into threats made by the same sort of thuggish and violent Islamo-fascists who probably cheered their heads off on 9/11. That's how I see it, at least.

*** Update #1 ***: Stephen Spruiell over at Media Blog confirmed that the censoring of Mohammed last night was "a Comedy Central decision" and not some kind of gag by Matt Parker and Trey Stone.

"Today these people will be marching to tell us "Your laws mean nothing to us. We have numbers. Our numbers trump your laws." We don't care about your rule of law. We care about working in your plants, your restaurants, your offices, your fields and on your construction projects so that we can send money back home to our families in Mexico. As soon as we can, we'll bring those families up here, regardless of what your laws say."

What is fueling these protests? One thing: A fear that the laws of this country might actually be enforced. A fear that people might actually be prevented from crossing our borders illegally, and a fear that those who break the law every single day of their lives by just being here might actually have to face the consequences for their illegal actions.

They say that they are not criminals. Sorry, if they're here illegally, they are criminals. They broke the law --- they're criminals. They say they just want to follow the American dream. Fine. There's a way to do that. First, obey the law." -- Neal Boortz

Foreign

Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb In 16 Days, U.S. Says

The Washington Post Runs A Deceptive And Dishonest Report About The Evaluation Of The Iraqi Trailers That Had Been Identified As Biological Weapons Labs Prior To The Invasion In March 2003

White House Seeks Apology From Washington Post

Rove Says Iran Leader Not Rational

Rice Calls for 'Strong Steps' Against Iran

Muslim says Muslims to blame for "Islamophobia"

Domestic

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Were Ordered Not To Arrest Any Illegal Aliens Attending Rallies

Protests Backfire! Zogby Poll: National Demonstrations By Illegal Aliens Have Negative Impact

Guest-Worker Hopes Spark Rush To Border

Idaho Store Fires People Who Attend Pro-Illegals Protest

Legal Analysis Of The Duke Lacrosse Team Case From A Prosecutor

Columns

Walter Williams: Immigration Vs. Gate-Crashing

Ann Coulter: Brown Is The New Black

GM Roper: Dear Republicans, You Need My Vote

Richard Lindzen: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Dissenting Scientists Into Silence

John Stossel: Exaggerating Dire 'Scientific' Warnings

Hugh Hewitt: The Arguments Against Striking Iran

Jack Kelly: Media Selectively Recycles Old News

W. Thomas Smith: Dispelling Myths About American Soldiers

Antonin Scalia: Don’t Impose Foreign Law On Americans

Arthur Brooks: Right-Wing Heart, Left-Wing Heart

Left-Overs

Freaks! Trio of Men Castrate Willing Men, Then Post The Video On Internet

Website Of The Day: Seixon

If the GOP were united on illegal immigration, we could beat the Democrats brains out politically on the issue. Just look at the backlash that's being created by these incredibly obnoxious illegal immigrant rallies:

More interesting polling data (all released yesterday) on immigration. A SurveyUSA poll of 500 adults in Phoenix shows 47% believe the recent pro-immigration protests are "creating a backlash," while 30% believe the mass demonstrations have helped the protesters "achieve their goals." Asked if "people who enter the United States illegally" make the country a better or worse place, 73% chose "worse" and only 21% "better."

The same questions were asked in a SurveyUSA poll of 500 Denver adults: 50% believed the demonstrations were backlashing, while 28% found them benefiting the protestors; and the worse/better breakdown was 71% to 24%. That worse/better question brought a 76% to 14% margin in a Little Rock, while in Wichita, 82% of those polled by SurveyUSA want to "increase border security to keep illegal immigrants from entering the U.S." (14% oppose such) while 73% believe the government should "attempt to find and deport those who are in the U.S. illegally" (only 20% oppose such).

Just imagine if the Republicans in the Senate took the same line as the Republicans in the House and pushed a bill that does nothing but secure the border and strengthen our immigration laws. Not only would it be wildly popular, but think of what a fantastic issue it would be for the elections in 2006. It would literally put the Democrats in a position where they would feel compelled to vote against securing the border.

Plus, think about the other issues that this would put in play:

-- The GOP would be the party that believes in respecting the law and the Democrats would be the party that believes in rewarding people for breaking the law.

-- The GOP would be the party sticking up for the jobs of poor Americans while the Democrats would be the party that wants to bring in foreigners to take jobs from Americans.

-- The GOP would be the party looking out for the American taxpayers, while the Democrats would be the party that wants to make illegals citizens so they can give them welfare and food stamps.

-- The GOP would be the party that puts Americans first, while Democrats would be the party for people who believe that foreigners should be given a leg up over Americans in America.

All it would take to make this happen would be to split border security and immigration enforcement, which is extremely popular with people from both parties, from a guest worker/citizenship program, which is incredibly controversial with people in both parties. If the Democrats want to argue that we should leave our borders wide-open for months or maybe even years while we debate a controversial guest worker program, let them make that argument, but that's certainly not the position that Republicans should be taking.

The GOP should unite behind a simple principle on illegal immigration: "Secure the border and enforce our laws." After all, since Americans overwhelmingly seem to agree on at least that much, why not start there and leave the more controversial ideas to be settled later? It would be the best thing for the country and for the Republican Party.

The conservative base is completely demoralized right now and furthermore, the President and the Republicans in Congress have terrible polling numbers. However, assuming things don't get any worse, I think the GOP will still retain control of the House and the Senate.

It's still early yet, so don't hold me to these numbers down the road, but at the moment, I'm seeing 6 Senate seats for the GOP that appear, to be in the "danger zone."

Santorum in Pennsylvania
Burns in Montana
DeWine in Ohio
Talent in Missouri
Chafee in Rhode Island
Frist's seat, which will be open, in Tennessee

However, chances are, the GOP won't lose all those seats. They'll also have a decent chance to pick up a few seats from the Dems. In the House, there are too many races to list, but at the moment, I'd put the Dems in the 5-11 seat pick-up range and they need 15 for a takeover. The Dems are also probably on track to pick-up 2-5 governorships.

Those are not pretty numbers.

But, could the GOP do worse? Yes, especially the way they're handling illegal immigration, but now's the time to cross your fingers and hope they've sunk about as low as they're going to get. On the other hand, is there room for improvement? Sure. The Democrats have a knack for self-destructing shortly after they open their big yaps on the campaign trail and the potential is there for big GOP gains at the polls on the economy, Iraq (as troops come home in the summer), and even spending and illegal immigration if we play it right.

You've got to hope the Republicans in Washington understand the situation, realize the clock is ticking, and are getting ready to take some substantive steps to shore up support before the elections. If they're going to make it work, now's the time to get it going.

In Iraq, the terrorists appear to be pursuing the same strategy that worked so well for the mujahideen in Afghanistan during their war against the Soviets.

Their goal is not to defeat the Coalition forces militarily, it's to convince the civilians back home that the war can't be won. Once that happens and Coalition troops are withdrawn, there'll be chaos, war, and bloodshed. Then, once again because of their superior will, the terrorists believe they can just hang in there until they can gain the strength to take over the country. At that point, the terrorists will be able to turn Iraq into the same sort of playground that Afghanistan was for them under the Taliban.

However, the US is using an entirely different strategy than the Soviets did in Afghanistan. The goal of the US is to build up the Iraqi troops to the point where they can police their own nation with minimal or no help from the US. Once the Iraqis get to that point, Coalition forces can go back home without leaving chaos in their wake and then the superior willpower of the terrorists will do them little good. It's not possible for them to "wait out" the Iraqi troops because since they live there, they've got nowhere else to go. Moreover, kidnappings, assassinations, car bombings, and suicide bombings may make for splashy headlines, but that won't win a war for you. For that, you need a real army than can take and hold territory, which is something the terrorists don't have.

So, probably by mid-2007 or so, when the Iraqi police and military will comprise almost the entire front line security force in Iraq, it will be the terrorists, not the Coalition, trapped in an unwinnable war.

At that point, will the terrorists have a chance to take over the country? No. What happens if they give-up? They'll be viewed as failures and lose face. Then what happens if they keep fighting and killing Muslims? They'll be viewed as butchers and lose face.

It'll be a no-win situation for the terrorists in Iraq and it's growing closer by the day.

As many of you know, the Daily Kos is the most popular political blog in the world. In fact, it's so beloved by liberals that people like Jimmy Carter and John Kerry have even posted there. So, that's why I think it's a good idea for conservatives to look at the Daily Kos, so we can see the sort of political super geniuses we're up against.

With that in mind, I'm going to post some excerpts from a Daily Kos diary by someone named Nathan Hammersmith. Mr. Hammersmith has a post up about Mark Warner, a man who will likely be a Democratic contender for the presidency in 2008. As you read Mr. Hammersmith's nuanced and witty take on Mark Warner, I think it'll give you a good look at the sort of hard hitting and incisive commentary that has made the Daily Kos the "go to blog" on the left.

From Mr. Hammersmith's diary, which is titled "F*ck Mark Warner:"

"I just got the new Atlantic Monthly, and I've read the article on Mark Warner, and I tell you this - this is a b*stard rich-f*ck like the tides are green with algae, and blue with blue-blood f*ck-all.

This is a b*stard extremis. And sorry if I'm imploding Democratic dreams with this...but...truth-teller that I am, I must speak truth to Democratic power."

...In a nutshell, Mark Warner is a recipient of maximum riches. Period. And I don't trust those motherf*cks, less than I trust motherf*cks who are of a purely partisan persuasion.

...I'm sorry, but I don't trust this motherf*ck. I sure don't trust his riches. Hey, color me crazy, but...the rich should ALWAYS be held in the lowest of low regards; the rich should be shat upon, and with prejudice...

...F*ck Mark Warner. He's another rich b*tch who's never known the pain of ends not meeting. Another piece of sh*t who's never contemplated the following: should I pay the rent, provide for my child, or pay the hospital bills from last month? Mark Warner is the PROBLEM, yo, and in a big motherf*cking way."

Wow. No wonder liberals flock to the Daily Kos every day and chip in money to whatever sure-to-be-losing candidate Kos has decided to back today. With pearls of wisdom like "the rich should be shat upon, and with prejudice" being dispensed daily, how could they resist?

Not only do I think Rumsfeld has been an excellent Secretary of Defense, I love it when he goes after the press. Just take a look at the smackdown Rummy laid on a reporter yesterday at a Department Of Defense press conference:

Q: Well, Mr. Secretary, in November of '01, the president, according to several books that you haven't disputed, said, "Start planning." And --

SEC. RUMSFELD: Do you think I'm going to stand around reading your books and disputing things in them or validating or not validating?

Q: Well --

SEC. RUMSFELD: I've got a real daytime job.

Q: I know --

SEC. RUMSFELD: I mean, you'd do nothing else but that if you did that. The fact that I haven't disputed something is -- I mean, if I disputed all the mythology that comes out of this group and the books of the world, I wouldn't have any time to do anything else.

Q: Yeah, but the record's starting to emerge here in terms of the decision-making track, and we just wanted to ask you. One -- November of '01, you were asked by the president to start looking into updating plans and --

SEC. RUMSFELD: I don't remember that myself, and I'd have to go back and look.

Q: Woodward --

SEC. RUMSFELD: But there's -- it is -- oh, Woodward's book is not the Bible.

Q: I know that. (Off mike.)

SEC. RUMSFELD: Some of you may not know that. (Subdued laughter.)

Q: The editors know that. (Laughter.)

SEC. RUMSFELD: (Chuckles.)

Hat tip to Wonkette for the story.

"(Illegal aliens) use $10 billion more in services at the federal level than they paid in taxes. ... The kicker for me is, if we legalize illegals and they began to pay taxes and use services like legal immigrants with the same level of education, the cost would roughly triple. An unskilled illegal immigrant is costly but an unskilled legal immigrant is a fiscal disaster because, although presumably he is being paid on the books and he pays his taxes like he’s supposed to, he is now eligible for everything, or a lot of things, but he still doesn't make any money.

That’s the problem. The reason immigrants create a fiscal cost is not because they are illegal. They create a fiscal cost because they have very little education and people with very little education don’t pay much in taxes, because they don’t make very much. But they tend to use a lot in services. If we legalize them, it makes the problem much worse.

Think about this: every unskilled worker who’s paid on the books mostly gets our $32 billion Earned Income Tax Credit. That means that every unskilled worker comes with a bill. That’s one of the reasons the costs explode so much if you legalize illegal immigrants. Right now, I estimate that illegals are getting one-tenth of what they are entitled to but if they began to get the EIT fee like legal immigrants, with the same level of education, well, the costs would go up 10 fold. That’s a welfare program a lot of conservatives like, but it’s also one that’s very expensive." -- Steve Camarota

Foreign

Terrorists Kill 40 In Pakistan

Iran Has Successfully Enriched Uranium For The First Time (Can We Crank Up The Bombers Faster Please?)

Claim: Council On Foreign Relations Told Of U.S. Plans For Iran Strike

Less International Tourists Coming To US

Domestic

The Signs From The Illegal Immigration Rallies You Didn't See On The Front Pages Of The NYTimes And Washington Post

GOP Chiefs Don't Want Illegal Immigrants Charged as Felons

15 Illegal Immigrants Lose Jobs After Attending Rally; Manager Says They Were Warned (Applause. Now If We Can Just Deport Them As Well...)

Illegal Immigration Rally Organizer Tied To Marxist Party

Cheers, Boos As Cheney Opens U.S. Baseball Game

Harlem Thugs Yuppie Hunting

UC Santa Cruz: Protesters Push Military Recruiters Off Campus

Columns

Zalmay Khalilzad and George W. Casey Jr: A Path To Success In Iraq (Free LA Times Reg Req)

Mark Steyn: Facing Down Iran

Phyllis Schlafly: Bush Is Out Of Touch With GOP Regarding Illegal Immigration

An Interview About Illegal Immigration With Steve Camarota From The Center Of Immigration Studies

Rich Lowry: Dems Are In The Grip Of A Grievance-Based Ethnic Politics

Douglas Turner: Immigration Bill Deserves To Die

Charles Krauthammer: Liberty, Equality, Mediocrity. The Strangest Revolution The French Have Ever Produced

Uncle Jimbo: Which Side Is The National Media On?

Left-Overs

US Boxer Muhammad Ali Has Sold An 80 Per Cent Interest In His Name And Image For $68.5 Million Dollars

Family Services Visits Britney Spears' Home

Left Blogs Lure, Bash Rep. Pelosi

Condi Rice & Watermelon Math

Website Of The Day: The Absurd Report

From the LA illegal immigrant protest.

More pics here and here.

Josh from Multiple Mentality writes:

RWN was just on CNN at 4:13pm, in their review of blogs talking about illegal immigration. Dunno if you caught it, wanted to pass it on."

Anyone catch it? If so, got any details?

#1) Convince the RINOS in Washington to help them make 8-12 million illegal aliens citizens rather than risk offending Hispanic Americans and the crooked businesses that knowingly hire "undocumented workers."

#2) Once they become citizens, the illegal aliens will probably vote for the Democrats by a 2-1 or maybe even a 3-1 margin and the net gain of millions of new votes will help the Democrats add seats in Congress and make it much more likely a Democrat will be elected President.

#3) Next, the Democrats will again team up with the RINOs to keep our immigration laws from being enforced, our borders from being secured, and employers from being penalized for hiring illegals. In short, they'll simply work to preserve the status quo.

#4) By roughly 2015, the next batch of 8-12 million illegals should be here and Republicans will be even more afraid of offending Hispanic Americans, especially since, by that point, so many of them will be former illegal aliens. They'll also be even more afraid of angering businesses that will have, by that point, spent another whole decade becoming more reliant on cheap labor from illegals.

Repeat steps 1-4 until the Democrats thoroughly dominate the House, the Senate, and the Presidency or until the GOP has to gut their entire agenda to stay competitive.

In the interests of bipartisanship, Right Wing News has decided to bring you an article called, "Open Letter to Muslim Terrorists," from someone called Hogeye Bill who posted it at the very left-wing Arkansas IndyMedia website.

Pay attention, you conservative warmongers, and you might learn a thing or two about diplomacy from this liberal wunderkind!

Dear Muslim Terrorist,

I know you're mad at the Christian terrorists from the US Empire, the ones that murder your children, occupy your country, and torture your fellows. Were I in your shoes, I'd probably feel the same way. I know there's nothing I can say that will bring back your loved ones, or change your quest for justice and revenge. I have but one small request. If you nuke a US city, please nuke Washington DC, not Fayetteville, Arkansas. Washington is the head of the beast. That's where the rulers abide, where all plots of Christian terrorism are hatched, where the terrorist plotting to kill your people and steal your land originates. That's where you need to bomb; those are the folks you need to kill.

Fayetteville is harmless. Yes, we have some braindead people who blindly follow rulers, and believe the lies of the fuhrers. You know the type. Just as deluded fools followed Saddam Hussein, the Shah of Iran and other political gods, we have zombies for Clinton and Bush and American political idols. But these weak-kneed followers are just walking dead - incapable of harm without imperialist voodoo priests chanting their patiotiotic spells. The high priests of Christian terrorism are in Washington, in the White House and the Pentagon. Please take them out, and leave the simple folks alone.

Frankly, most Americans would be greatly in your debt if you nuked Washington. The Imperial Rulers steal nearly half of American working people's product; they imprison a larger percentage of we who live here than any other State in the world - what with its permanent mock wars on drug users and immigrants, landowners, the productive and the poor. The rulers of the US Evil Empire have debased our money, seduced our children into becoming murderers, and sell our future for their short-term personal plundered booty. Frankly, many of us would cheer if Washington DC were nuked into oblivion.

The Fayettevilles and Sprindales of people's America were never your enemy. Fayetteville has no bases in your holy lands, for Fayetteville has no standing army, no missles, no bombs, and no military industrial complex. We do have a farmers' market and a pretty good library. We have a University which welcomes Muslim students, and teaches rhetoric and philosophy and tolerance. Fayetteville is not your enemy. We denounce the Christian terrorism of the rulers in Washington DC. We welcome you to "have at them." I'll buy you a beer at Roger's Rec if you take out the White House.

Is that you, Jimmy Carter?

Hat tip to Little Green Footballs for the link.

This is what "jobs Americans aren't willing to do" translates into in the real world:

An Alabama employment agency that sent 70 laborers and construction workers to job sites in that state in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina says the men were sent home after just two weeks on the job by employers who told them "the Mexicans had arrived" and were willing to work for less.

Linda Swope, who operates Complete Employment Services Inc. in Mobile, Ala., told The Washington Times last week that the workers -- whom she described as U.S. citizens, residents of Alabama and predominantly black -- had been "urgently requested" by contractors hired to rebuild and clear devastated areas of the state, but were told to leave three job sites when the foreign workers showed up.

"After Katrina, our company had 70 workers on the job the first day, but the companies decided they didn't need them anymore because the Mexicans had arrived," Mrs. Swope said. "I assure you it is not true that Americans don't want to work.

"We had been told that 270 jobs might be available, and we could have filled every one of them with men from this area, most of whom lost their jobs because of the hurricane," she said. "When we told the guys they would not be needed, they actually cried ... and we cried with them. This is a shame."

What "jobs Americans aren't willing to do" really means is that people who come here from Third World countries and don't pay health care, don't pay for auto-insurance, and may not even pay any taxes, can take jobs from poor Americans who do.

If you're an American working in food service, construction, agriculture or any of the other fields rife with illegals, those "undocumented workers" are taking money out of your pocket by undercutting your wages and they may even be threatening your ability to keep your job and support your family.

How much sense does it make to bring in poor foreigners, whose presence here ends up being subsidized by the American taxpayers in a myriad of different ways, when these illegals just end up taking jobs from poor Americans?

"The mainstream media loves John McCain and they regularly write fawning articles referring to him as a "maverick" and a "straight-talker." Because of this, McCain polls well among Democrats and Independents.

However, the reason McCain is so well liked by the media is because they're liberals and they love it when he trashes other Republicans. But, what would happen if John McCain actually became the Republican nominee? The same members of the mainstream media who gush over him today would turn on him in a Minnesota minute and once his great press ended, his poll numbers with Independents and Democrats would start to drop precipitously." -- John Hawkins: March 15, 2006

Actually, the left has started turning on McCain even earlier than I anticipated. From Howard Kurtz's column in the WAPO yesterday:

"New York Times columnist Paul Krugman: "It's time for some straight talk about John McCain. He isn't a moderate. He's much less of a maverick than you'd think. And he isn't the straight talker he claims to be."

Arianna Huffington, the author and blogger, says she "admired" and "loved" McCain. But, she writes, "watching a true American hero hang a For Sale sign on his principles is a profoundly sad thing."

Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne: "If McCain spends the next two years obviously positioning himself to win Republican primary votes, he will start to look like just another politician. Once lost, a maverick's image is hard to earn back."

The American Prospect's Mark Schmitt writes that people should "have no illusions: McCain is a very conservative Republican who has now embarked on the project of reaffirming his position as the rightful heir to Barry Goldwater's politics as well as his Senate seat."

This goes to show what a foolish mistake it would be to support McCain because of "electability." McCain's popularity is a castle built on sand. He has polled well with Dems & Independents because liberals say nice things about him. They say nice things about him because he attacks other Republicans, which helps Democrats. So, what happens when McCain becomes a threat to Democrats instead of helping them? Liberals start attacking him and the whole daisy chain falls apart.

Here's some real "straight talk:" Republicans couldn't make a bigger mistake in 2008 than having John McCain as their candidate....well, OK, Chuck Hagel would be a bigger mistake -- but you get the idea.

When you're reading posts like this at National Review of all places, you have to take it as a really bad omen for the GOP's chances in 2006:

"I'm disgruntled, too, and I'm going to get it all of my chest this morning: I've never voted for a Democrat in a general election in my life, and I don't expect to anytime soon, but it's been impossible for me over the past couple of years to get enthused about the Republican party. I voted for President Bush twice, and contributed to his campaign twice, but held my nose when I did it the second time. I don't consider myself a Republican any longer. Thanks to this Administration and the Republicans in Congress, the Republican Party today is the party of pork-barrel spending, Congressional corruption — and, I know folks on this web site don't want to hear it, but deep down they know it's true — foreign and military policy incompetence. Frankly, speaking of incompetence, I think this Administration is the most politically and substantively inept that the nation has had in over a quarter of a century. The good news about it, as far as I'm concerned, is that it's almost over." -- George Conaway

Actually, I think George Bush has done an excellent job handling foreign policy under some extremely difficult circumstances and although I don't have a lot of kind words for W's domestic policy or his political acumen in his 2nd term, I think Conaway is being too tough on him.

Still, unless W. wants to spend the rest of his term backpedaling, under political fire, he needs to change his attitude, he needs to change his strategery, and he needs to change some of his policies to bring conservatives back on board. There are a lot of George Conaways out there and George Bush cannot afford to write them off.

The good news is that most disaffected Republicans WANT to believe that they're judging George Bush too harshly. The bad news is that if George Bush doesn't make some big changes in the way he's doing business, he's going to have a lot of trouble bringing these people back into the fold. Bush and the GOP in Washington need to understand that the clock is ticking, the hour is late, and if they're going turn things around in time for November, they don't have a moment to spare.

"For many years now, human-caused climate change has been viewed as a large and urgent problem. In truth, however, the biggest part of the problem is neither environmental nor scientific, but a self-created political fiasco. Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero).

Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

In response to these facts, a global warming devotee will chuckle and say "how silly to judge climate change over such a short period". Yet in the next breath, the same person will assure you that the 28-year-long period of warming which occurred between 1970 and 1998 constitutes a dangerous (and man-made) warming. Tosh. Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

Does something not strike you as odd here? That industrial carbon dioxide is not the primary cause of earth's recent decadal-scale temperature changes doesn't seem at all odd to many thousands of independent scientists. They have long appreciated - ever since the early 1990s, when the global warming bandwagon first started to roll behind the gravy train of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - that such short-term climate fluctuations are chiefly of natural origin. Yet the public appears to be largely convinced otherwise. How is this possible?" -- Bob Carter

"In 2002, a dozen American college students, in Mexico legally, participated peacefully in an environmental protest against a planned airport outside of Mexico City. They swiftly found themselves deported as law-breakers for interfering in Mexico’s internal affairs.

If Mexico was willing to strip these students of their duly-obtained travel visas, imagine what it would have done had the students broken into the country surreptitiously—not just summary deportation but undoubtedly howls of complaint to the U.S. government for winking at this double violation of Mexican sovereignty. Open borders propagandists in the U.S. constantly present deportation as a patent act of cruelty that no right-thinking person would tolerate. Yet Mexico has no qualms about deporting not just illegals but legal immigrants as well whom it deems fractious." -- Heather Mac Donald

Domestic

Illegal Immigrants & Their Supporters Fill Streets Across The Nation

Pics From The Rochester Illegal Immigration Rally: "Open The Borders! Close The Pentagon! Socialist Worker

American Counter Protestor Beaten At Maine Illegal Immigration Rally

Dallas Protest AAR: No Pics, I’m Afraid, Since The Prostestors Smashed My Camera: "Gringos Go Back To Europe!”

Latinos Divided On The Immigration Issue

Arrival Of Aliens Ousts U.S. Workers

Mexican-Flag Burners Plan More Protests (This Is Dumb And Counter-Productive)

Bush Says He Declassified Pre-War Intel

Lawyers: No DNA Match in Duke U. Scandal

Army Surpassing Year's Retention Goal By 15%

Foreign

Italy Heads Toward Split In Parliament

Hamas: Israeli Move "A Declaration Of War"

France Scraps Youth Job Law

Powell: U.S. Mistakes Hurting Iraq Now (Thank You, Captain Obvious)

Columns

Heather Mac Donald: What Would Mexico Do with Protesting Illegals?

Mac Johnson: Don't Cry For The Failed Immigration 'Compromise'

National Review: Katherine Harris Should Drop Out Of The Race In Florida (Agreed)

John Fund: Flirting With Disaster. Will 2006 Be For Republicans What 1994 Was For Democrats?

Bob Carter: There Is A Problem With Global Warming... It Stopped In 1998

Rich Lowry: What Bush Should Do (Good Advice)

Left-Overs

NASA To Crash Space Probe Into Moon

Video: New System Acts As A "Force Field" Against RPGs

Cheney Once On Receiving End Of Shotgun

Britney Spears Drops Out Of 'Sexiest 100'

Lions To Protect Pregnant Jolie's Privacy: Paper

Website Of The Day: The Cpl Nich Dieruf Memorial Fund

I was in a teleconference call this afternoon with Congressman Jack Kingston.

It was a far ranging discussion, but most of it centered around illegal immigration. I said, in essence, that since there is no appetite for enforcing the law, now, how can we do a guest worker program? Couldn't we end up with guest workers and illegals? His answer, in essence, was yes, that might happen, but businesses need workers.

Sigh.

More write ups below:

Captain's Quarters
Tim Chapman over at Townhall's Capitol Report
Mary Katharine Ham over at Hugh Hewitt's Blog
Kim Priestap from Wizbang!

On Wednesday of last week, I was pleased to get an opportunity to do an interview by phone with Arkansas Governor, Mike Huckabee. Mr. Huckabee is considered to be a dark horse candidate for President in 2008 and he has been generating an increasing amount of buzz. We discussed a number of topics including Iraq, Iran, illegal immigration, taxes, Roe v. Wade, a Federal Marriage Amendment, health care, and a Balanced Budget Amendment among other topics.

You can read the transcript of our interview, which was edited for the sake of clarity and to avoid repetition, here.

Kevin from Eckernet attended the illegal immigration rally in Minnesota yesterday and has lots of pics.

Here are a couple that stood out:

Guatemala's flag hoisted above the US flag

Ecuador's flag flies over the US flag. It was at this point I think someone realized I wasn't a "friendly" and tried to knock my camera from my hands

It's amazing, isn't it? You have illegal aliens marching in our streets, demanding things they have no right whatsoever to ask for, while they're insulting our nation by flying the flag of the country they left above our flag. The sheer gall of these illegal aliens is just beyond belief.

*** Update #1 ***: From the Dallas illegal alien rally via Michelle Malkin:

So, John McCain, Mike DeWine, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter, Sam Brownback, George Bush, & Bill Frist..

Can you explain to us again why in the world we'd want to put the sort of person who was carrying this sign on the "path to citizenship?"

Also, could you explain again why we're better off having this person here in a guest worker program than a decent person who respected our laws enough to wait in line to enter this country legally?

Heck, if you're really in a generous mood, you could explain to us why we should believe there will be a security crackdown on illegals later, after the amnesty and guest worker programs are pushed through, when tens of thousands and in some cases, even hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens can gather in our streets, apparently without the slightest fear of being deported?

From last to first...

(Currently Reading) Mona Charen: Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help (and the Rest of Us)

40) Roy Hazelwood & Stephen Michaud: Dark Dreams: Sexual Violence, Homicide and the Criminal Mind (B: If you enjoyed abnormal psych in college or are interested in profiling, this is a capitivating, albeit disturbing, book)

39) Claire Berlinski: Menace in Europe: Why the Continent's Crisis Is America's, Too (B: Her style, which involves taking personal stories and weaving them into broad narratives works extremely well in most cases, but not so well in others. Still, this was a thought provoking book that showcased some seldom discussed, but very relevant ideas about Europe)

38) Edwin Feulner & Doug Wilson: Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today (B: This is chock full of good ideas and interesting factoids.)

37) Tom Bethell: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science (D: This book has a lot of fascinating information in it, but some of the chapters, for example on cancer and aids in Africa, struck me as a bit flakey and "off." That left me unsure of how much of the book to trust.)

36) Larry Elder: The Ten Things You Can't Say In America (A-: If it wasn't for the chapter advocating legalizing drugs, this would qualify as a conservative masterpiece.)

35) Barry Goldwater: The Conscience of a Conservative (C+: I didn't agree with some of Goldwater's views on race issues and the book feels a bit dated, perhaps because so many of his ideas have already been adopted and talked to death by conservatives and libertarians, but it was readable.)

34) Charles Pickering: Supreme Chaos: The Politics of Judicial Confirmation & the Culture War (B-: Pickering is magnificent, as good as you're going to come across, when it comes to putting contentious issues that have come before the court into perspective for conservatives, but the book bogs down a bit when he talks about his own story.)

33) Ken Starr: First Among Equals: The Supreme Court In American Life (C-: Extremely informative, but also dry as dust. I'm not even sure this book is intended for a layman.)

32) Stuart Bell, Stan Campbell, James S. Bell: The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Bible (A+: Very well written, very informative, easy to read through, and great reading. Highly recommended, especially if you want to learn more about the Bible, but are intimidated by the length and all the, "who begat who's.")

31) Rush Limbaugh: The Way Things Ought to Be (A -- Reread: This is one of the conservative classics. It's still a great read, although it feels a bit dated since it discusses a number of current events and it's more than a decade old.)

(continued...)

The memo you're about to see, dated March 17, 2001, comes from a brigadier general in the Iraqi Air Force and if it's genuine, and it certainly seems to be at first glance, it should be front page news in every paper in America:

Top secret memoranda sent to Al-Kadisseiya Military branch No.2205 dated 04/03/2001 and to the Headquarters of Zee karr military branch No. 246 dated: 08/03/2001 that we were informed by another memo from Ali Unit military branch No. 154 dated: 10/03/2001. We urge you to inform the above mentioned unit of the names of people wishing to volunteer for suicide action to liberate Palestine and strike American interests according to the following below for your information and to let us know.

So, pre-9/11, Saddam was looking for suicide bombers to strike "American interests?" Could that mean he was looking for people to participate in 9/11? That seems unlikely. But, could it mean that our invasion may have saved the US from terrorist attacks sponsored by the Iraqi regime? That's entirely possible. Remember that Putin has also said Iraq was looking to launch terrorist attacks at America:

"I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received...information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations."

When liberals try to tell you that we'd actually be safer if Saddam was still in power, keep in mind that the best evidence available seems to strongly suggest that he was planning terrorist attacks against the United States.

"Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science," they wrote in the Canadian Financial Post last week.

They emphasised that the study of global climate change is, in Mr Harper's own words, an "emerging science" and added: "If, back in the mid 1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary." Despite claims to the contrary, there is no consensus among climate scientists on the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, they wrote.

"'Climate change is real' is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified.

"Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural 'noise'." -- 60 leading international climate change experts

Pretty surprising. But then, the Washington Post has, even while being a liberal-leaning paper, attempted to be a straight-shooter and not make its double-standards too untenable. Unlike the New York Times, of course.

PRESIDENT BUSH was right to approve the declassification of parts of a National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq three years ago in order to make clear why he had believed that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. Presidents are authorized to declassify sensitive material, and the public benefits when they do. But the administration handled the release clumsily, exposing Mr. Bush to the hyperbolic charges of misconduct and hypocrisy that Democrats are leveling.

...

...

The affair concerns, once again, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV and his absurdly over-examined visit to the African country of Niger in 2002. Each time the case surfaces, opponents of the war in Iraq use it to raise a different set of charges, so it's worth recalling the previous iterations. Mr. Wilson originally claimed in a 2003 New York Times op-ed and in conversations with numerous reporters that he had debunked a report that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Niger and that Mr. Bush's subsequent inclusion of that allegation in his State of the Union address showed that he had deliberately "twisted" intelligence "to exaggerate the Iraq threat." The material that Mr. Bush ordered declassified established, as have several subsequent investigations, that Mr. Wilson was the one guilty of twisting the truth. In fact, his report supported the conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium.

...

As Mr. Fitzgerald pointed out at the time of Mr. Libby's indictment last fall, none of this is particularly relevant to the question of whether the grounds for war in Iraq were sound or bogus. It's unfortunate that those who seek to prove the latter would now claim that Mr. Bush did something wrong by releasing for public review some of the intelligence he used in making his most momentous decision.

Wow. At least one major media outlet has resisted full-blown Bush Derangement Syndrome.

This content was used with the permission of Ace of Spades HQ. Also, thanks to Allah.

*** Update #1: *** Two quick notes from Hawkins on this:

#1) The liberal blogs are absolutely flipping out about this editorial. That's because they believe they forced the WAPO to agree to hire another lefty blogger, as well as cave on the way they covered the Abramhoff story. You give the lefty bloggers an inch and they'll take a mile.

#2) The fact that this story is getting so much linkage on the right and causing so much angst on the left just goes to show how rare editorials supporting the Bush administration on any controversial topic actually have been, which in turn just proves how liberal these big papers really are. When they actually get behind the Bush administration on something, it causes a sensation because it so seldom happens.

Foreign

Plane Carrying House Members Fired On With Russian Missile C-130's Defenses Repelled Anti-Aircraft Device Aimed At Delegation On 'Lights-Out' Iraq Flight

Iran 'Shoots Down Unmanned Plane'

North Korea's Defence Chief Has Warned That Pyongyang Could Also Launch A Pre-Emptive Attack Against The United States, With State Media Saying Soldiers Were Ready To Be "Human Bombs."

July 7 Bombs In London Were A 'Demo' Not Terrorism, Claims Professor. He Also Said That To Refer To The Attacks As Terrorism Risked "Demonising" Those Involved.

Saudi Arabia May Join Nuclear Club

U.S. Study Paints Somber Portrait Of Iraqi Discord (Free New York Times Reg Req)

Domestic

350,000 To 500,000 Illegals March In Dallas

Signs From The Illegal Immigration Rally In Dallas: "Honkies, Why Don't You Take Your *sses Back To Europe"

House Of Representatives Majority Leader John Boehner On Sunday Rejected Efforts To Establish A Guest Worker Program In The United States (Applause)

Gossip Reporters Shakes Down Billionare For Protection From Lies In Print

Man Apprehended On White House Grounds. Secret Service Arrest Bearded Man, 40, Seen Screaming On The Front Lawn

House Ethics Panel's Top Democrat Denies Charges

Ed Klein, The Author Of A Controversial Tell-All Biography Of Hillary Clinton Is Turning His Attention To John McCain, In What Could Take Apart The "Mr Clean" Image Of The Frontrunner For The 2008 Republican Presidential Nomination

Columns

Mark Steyn: No Easy Answers On Immigration Conundrum (Superb)

Ralph Peters: Does Iran Want War?

Don Feder: No Amnesty for Republicans

Victor Davis Hanson: Has Ahmadinejad Miscalculated?

Left-Overs

Brutal Torture Camp Turns Afghan Boys Pro-America

Guerrilla Gardeners Loose In London

Thanks For The Compliment

Manila: Judge's Psychic Leanings Too Over The top

Video: A Monkey And Dog Playing Together

Website Of The Day: Right Thinking Girl