Politics Blog

The more I hear about Larry Craig’s likely replacement, Jim Risch, the more I like the guy.

I’ve already noted that he’s solidly against illegal immigration. Now here’s a Risch quote on Katrina:

“Here in Idaho, we couldn’t understand how people could sit around on the kerbs waiting for the federal government to come and do something. We had a dam break in 1976, but we didn’t whine about it. We got out our backhoes and we rebuilt the roads and replanted the fields and got on with our lives. That’s the culture here. Not waiting for the federal government to bring you drinking water. In Idaho there would have been entrepreneurs selling the drinking water.”

I feel like Risch could become one of the best senators in the country, another Tom Coburn.

— PoliPundit

Why did Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) have to resign, but not Senator David Vitter (R-LA)?

Liberal POV: Vitter may have used an escort service, but Craig is gay. There’s no place for gays in the hate-filled modern Republican party.

Democrat POV: Who cares? This will be yet another nail in the GOP’s coffin in 2008.

My (and many other conservatives’) POV: Craig was one of the strongest backers of amnesty for illegal aliens, Vitter is one of the strongest supporters of American sovereignty. I can forgive a lot from a pro-borders guy, but will do everything I can to replace the pro-illegals guy. (In case you missed it: Jim Risch, Craig’s likely replacement, is very good on the illegal immigration issue.)

Republican POV: We’re in enough trouble without having to defend a gay senator with a “wide stance.”

Your POV? Click Comments and discuss.

— PoliPundit

The most powerful weapons in the arsenal against illegal immigration are so-called “no-match” letters, which would be sent to employers who blatantly hire large numbers of people with bogus Social Security numbers. Those employers would have 90 days to either make those employees correct the discrepancies, or fire them.

Now Maxine Chesney, a Clinton-appointed federal district judge in San Francisco, has temporarily barred the sending of these letters, which would have been sent out on September 14. The judge says she needs “breathing room” to make a decision on these letters, so she’s putting them on hold until she gets around to holding a hearing on October 1. This federal judge is actively undermining the laws and sovereignty of the United States because she needs “breathing room.”

Here are phone numbers for the court in question. Perhaps one of us could try to get through to the judge in question and let her know what we think… Start with the clerk’s office.

— PoliPundit

Border Security…Immigration…the two most pressing issues we face in the United States today.

Join us LIVE from the Border, Wednesday, September 5th @ 6:30pm EST.

On the next Conservatives with Attitude! BlogTalkRadio show, A.J. Sparxx is joined by his co-host Richard Ross as he reports live from the border of the United States and Mexico. Ross is traveling the border with the Minutemen…the men helping to secure our nation. Hear first hand accounts of the situation on the border. The Conservatives with Attitude! Radio Show, live 6:30pm EST. on Wednesday September 5.

Dial in Number: (646) 716-7229

— ‘The Commish’ A.J. Sparxx

Aaaahahahahahahaahaha!

Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The resultshave been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), Posted in Politics | Comments Off