Weekend Opinion Roundup

The NYT does a sob story routine on ICE doing its job and arresting illegal aliens in the course of a sweep for illegal alien gang members.

The Times also fronts the story about how the Administration is cutting back on its political goals in Iraq. Even as the security situation stabilizes and is improving, the Times has to find something to bitch about.

Linda Boyd (who?!) at the Seattle "Dumb as a" Post Intelligencer, wants impeachment begun against the Administration now. And she'll settle for nothing less. Too bad. So sad.

The WaPo runs with the Bilal Hussein story and says that he was arrested for telling the story that the US military didn't want everyone to see.

Right. Cozying up with terrorists and being caught with al Qaeda as they were plotting. That's the story that the US military didn't want us to know? Maybe that's what AP didn't want us to know.

We know that Reuters didn't want anyone to know about Jamil Hussein after it was found by bloggers that his stories were nothing more than exaggerations and falsehoods.

People simply aren't buying into the media's agenda anymore because the facts simply do not support their positions.

Impeachment isn't going to happen against the current Administration, no matter what the leftists wish for. They don't have the numbers, and they certainly don't have the facts on their side.

Supporters for open borders have run into something of a rough patch, especially in the wake of the Whiplash Spitzer drivers license plan for illegal aliens. That episode showed just where the open borders crowd was headed, and the majority of Americans realized that this simply wouldn't do. Sob stories about illegal aliens arrested because they were here illegally simply do not curry favor with me. What part of illegal aliens do the media types not understand? They can try to repackage illegal aliens as undocumented workers, but the harsh reality is that these people have broken federal law by entering and/or remaining in the US without following federal immigration law. They should not be rewarded for their efforts.

Meanwhile, the San Francisco Chronicle has begun a new comments policy, which was undeclared until bloggers found out about it.

If you make a comment on an article posted at SFGate, and if the site moderators then subsequently delete your comment for whatever reason, it will only appear as deleted to the other readers. HOWEVER, your comment will NOT appear to be deleted if viewed from your own computer! The Chronicle's goal is to trick deleted commenters into not knowing their comments were in fact deleted. I'll give evidence below showing how they do this.

Seems that they enabled some code on their comments section that enabled the editors to delete the posts but let those whose comments were deleted to see that their post was still there. In other words, a commenter wouldn't necessarily know whether their post was deleted or not. Nice way to foster debate. If they don't agree with the company line, they delete the post but don't let the commenter know its been deleted.