Safe and secure
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Safe and secure
Good news about my friend the former Daily News intern Jose Antonio Vargas:
Jose Antonio Vargas, the writer and activist who went public last year with his status as an undocumented immigrant, was arrested for a driving infraction in Minnesota on Friday, but federal immigration authorities did not detain him or take any other action, officials said Saturday.
Vargas, a former Washington Post reporter who revealed his status in The New York Times Magazine and touched off a debate in the journalistic community, was initially pulled over by a state trooper for driving while wearing head phones, Eric Roeske, public information officer for the Minnesota state patrol, told POLITICO.
“He did produce a Washington driver’s license” after being pulled over, Roeske said. “When the trooper ran the license, it showed the status [of the license] was canceled. It also indicated there may have been fraudulent activity associated with the license. That’s why [it might have been] canceled. That triggered the trooper to look into that further and contact ICE (U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement).”
Roeske, who had no details about the possible “fraudulent activity” regarding the license, said Vargas, who was in Minnesota for a speaking engagement that he ended up missing, “spoke to our captain that works with ICE, he had some conversations with Mr. Vargas.” Roeske said he didn’t “know what the nature of that conversation was.”
I guess Jose must have said the secret word ("Swordfish"?) because he remains a free man here in the United States -- fighting for the rights of people like himself, who were brought here as children, to remain and be recognized as Americans.
Comments (145)
"However, not watching Maddow, does not put me in 'an alternate universe'. In fact it puts me in pretty good company as her ratings are ridiculously low. "
You said:
"I would have thought that killing a US citizen via drone would have gotten more 'outrage' from the left, even though it was Barry in charge."
I gave you an example of Milquetoast corporate "liberals" condemning it (and if you think MSNBC is "the Left" you are, indeed, living in an alternate reality). I don't care if you watch Rachel Maddow or The Wiggles, your whole argument is nonsense.
You really should keep your stories straight.
"I guess I missed the criticism on MSNBC- and yes, I actually do watch a fair amount of that outlet"
— Hamlet- Wiseman - my first attempt at a response got eaten. It seems the fiiltering software is hungry today
===]]] @tps- And anonymous drone strikes from the sky are different in the context of increasing the US 'moral authority' how exactly? [[[===
That is a straw man argument. But even moving beyond that, there is much legitimate debate among military and intelligence experts about drone policy w/r/t to moral and/or legal authority and the potential of undermining both in being counter-effective in the larger fight against terrorism. That debate does not exist among experts, for the most part, w/r/t the use of torture. It's counterproductivity is pretty much a slam dunk. And further, there is little debate among experts about the ineffectiveness of torture as an interrogation methodology. Drone strikes are certainly more arguable as a methodology.
==]] Especially coming from an administration that originally wanted to move Gitmo trials to the US court system. [[==
These seems exploitative. The administration underestimated the political battle that would result from attempts to have trials on mainland soil. That doesn't address the legitimacy of the approach - and whether or not the administration pulled it off does not speak directly to the potential to impact moral and/or legal authority.
— Talking point sleuth - Part II
==]] So how did we improve our moral standing in the world by claiming that KSM would be tried in the NY court system which never was going to happen? [[==
That seems politically exploitative. Whether or not the trials were actually moved does not necessarily speak to the impact if they had been.
==]] Then, somehow Barry not only continued Bush's use of drones but actually expanded them to be used against American citizens. [[==
This also seems politically exploitative. What is your point, actually? If you are against the use of drones, and feel that they are counterproductive, then expansion of the drone program would logically be that much more counterproductive. If you support the use of drones, then you would feel the opposite. Again, your point seems more like one of partisan battling (nah, nah, "the left" are hypocrites) than one of substance. (Personally, I don't think that the moral/political/strategic/legal implications of using drones is contingent on the citizenry of the target. I find the use of citizenry in those discussions to be mostly political expediency.
===]]] I'm still waiting for Barry's 'more civilized approach' with respect to Iran to bear fruit. [[[==
Again, that is a complicated topic - not one well-served by simplistic rhetoric. Do you think that a more aggressive approach with Iran would have born more fruit? In what way? Do you think that the Bush administration's policies (with many of the same advisors as Romney relies on) - that strengthened Iran's position exponentially, "bore fruit?"— Talking point sleuth - @tps- With all due respect, this administration has a pretty real track record of underestimating everything, doesn't it?
Should I start with, "if I don't have this thing turned around in three years, it will be a one term proposition..."
Or maybe "closing Gitmo" on day one?
Or maybe, if we enact this stimulus (not the one he really wanted) unemployment won't go above 8%.
Or how about 'shovel ready jobs'?— Wiseman6 - Mich McConnell said, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." And he meant it. If it took obstructing everything good the president tried to do, if it meant harming the economy and making Americans suffer...the SINGLE most important thing was to get Obama out of office.
And so Republican talking points this election year focus on what the president didn't get done. Any focus on what their guy is going to do is off limits - that is until last Wednesday when that guy simply lied his @$$ off.
I won't go over, point by point, everything the Republicans did to hurt our country just to make the president look bad, it's public knowledge to anyone who does not live in that alternate reality.
(sigh) Arguing with people who want you to prove the sky is blue is very tiring so I guess I'll just get back to work.
— Hamlet - @tps- The point is that Barry tried to take the moral high ground with respect to terrorists, how they would be dealt with, and what actions he would take. He did this without considering the political difficulties that he could expect to encounter. Understandable especially given his lack of experience for the job.
Don't get me wrong, I support the drone program, but don't tell me about how the use of drones allows the US to maintaing the high moral ground when it comes to dealing with terrorists, in contrast to using torture.— Wiseman6 - @hamlet- I did not say that because I didn't see Maddow's criticism of the drones, it didn't happen. You gave me one example, fine, and that makes my argument nonsense. You are right...
The fact remains that regardless of what McConnell said, that Barry had complete control of the Congress for his first two years in office and spent all of his time on healthcare rather than the economy. Where were all the great Dem ideas on how to get the economy going when they could actually do something about it without needing a single Republican vote? Why did the elections of 2010 go the way they did and which party controlled Congress for those two years?
I agree that you should go back to work..
— Wiseman6 - ===]]] With all due respect, this administration has a pretty real track record of underestimating everything, doesn't it? [[[===
So that is your point?
I see many reasons to believe that a Romney administration will be just as prone to underestimating or overestimating as it serves them politically - in fact likely more so.
But that has nothing to do directly with the substantive questions w/r/t the costs/benefits policies we were discussing. Whether or not the Obama administration underestimated the political difficulty of moving the trials does not speak to the question of whether moving the trials would have enhanced our moral and/or legal authority in the fight against terrorism. (and I do not see how underestimating the political difficulty of doing so could credibly be argued to have undermined our moral and/or legal authority or undermined our fight against terrorism strategically).
It seems like you are bent on using any topic - including questions about our security - to express that political expediency. I get it. You don't like Obama. Why use unrelated "concerns" about drones, torture, moving the trials, etc., to make that point?— Talking point sleuth - @tps- This president ran on a scant record, without any relevant experience for the job. It was easy for him to campaign with flowery platitudes like hope and change, without having a dismal performance hung around his neck like it is now. In 2008, a fawning public and media were only too happy to feed into the cult of personality that is Barack Obama.
He overpromised and underdelivered, which should be a fatal error. Excpet when it come to Barry. He has never been questioned on any of it let alone admitting a mistake and accepting responsibility.
At your place of employment, how many times are you allowed to be so completely wrong, without anyone at the place calling you out on the carpet for it? In the constuction business, how many jobs do you think you are allowed to 'underestimate' on a fixed contract before either the Company is out of business or you are out of a job.
The Presidency is not a soccer game where everyone gets a medal just for trying. No credit is given for failing to understand the gravity of the problem at hand. The administration has 'underestimated' in several areas. Would you prefer to argue that it is stupid, naive or incompetent?
If Romney over promises and under delivers, I will have no problem criticizing him for it. But at this time, Barry has had his chance and it is time for someone else to take a shot.
— Wiseman6 - TPS, you didn't expect a coherent answer, did you?
Wiseman, while cooking spaghetti do you throw a strand at the wall to see if it sicks? I hear that's the best way to tell when it's ready.
Yes, yes, I'm going back to work again...— Hamlet - I meant, *sticks*— Hamlet
- Nationally, Gallup has it all tied up among registered voters -- with the president dangerously below 50 at 47%. Rasmussen uses the more reliable likely voter screen and has Romney up 49-47%.
In the Real Clear Politics poll of polls, nationally Romney is only down .09%. A week ago he was down over 4 points.
In Ohio, according to RCP's poll of polls, Obama's Ohio lead has shrunk to three -- Virginia has Obama only up by 0.3. Florida and Colorado are tied.
The good news for Romney is that we are now seeing polls from each of these states with the GOP nominee in the lead. The bad news for Obama is that in most of these swing state polls, he is not hitting 50.
Well, actually the worst news for Obama is 85% of the calls made for this new Battleground Poll were made prior to Obama humiliating himself in last week's debate.
— Fisher - @hamlet- Yup, that's exactly what I do. Is there another way? Are you a professional 'spaghetti cooker'?
Please share your expertise on cooking spaghetti with me. My family is tired of eating it off the wall...
A challenge of coherency of an argument requires evidence and not just your opinion. Explain how Barry hasn't over promised and under delivered. It is his lack of understanding of the problems that led him to promise what he couldn't possibly deliver. You and tps are willing to continue to give Barry a free pass. I am not.— Wiseman6 - @hamlet- Yup, that's exactly what I do. Is there another way? Are you a professional 'spaghetti cooker'?
Please share your expertise on cooking spaghetti with me. My family is tired of eating it off the wall...
A challenge of coherency of an argument requires evidence and not just your opinion. Explain how Barry hasn't over promised and under delivered. It is his lack of understanding of the problems that led him to promise what he couldn't possibly deliver. You and tps are willing to continue to give Barry a free pass. I am not.— Wiseman6 - wiseman -
I will point out that you have completely abandoned discussing the issues we first engaged on.
===]]] He overpromised and underdelivered, [[[===
I agree. But then I never particularly cared about what he "promised" and he has "delivered" pretty much in line with my expectations.
===]]] which should be a fatal error. Except when it come to Barry. [[[===
Here I see selective logic. I would say that Bush over-promised and under-delivered by substantially wider margins. W/o even considering the economy, his over-promise and under-delivery w/r/t Iraq alone was exponentially greater than Obama's across the board. Yet Bush was reelected.
The reality is that most voters understand that over-promising and under-delivering are pretty much part-and-parcel with our electoral process. That is why Obama is leading in the election despite a poor economy. Only those with a binary mentality and a desire to exploit any failure consider such phenomena to be fatal - and then they usually only do that on a partisan basis. Romney's entire platform is based on overpromising - such as, for just one example, his claims of a $5 trillion tax cut w/o a loss in revenue. Anyone who takes that kind of claim at face value is ignoring the fact of over-promising.
I don't assume that you are unconcerned about terrorism or policies like fast and furious - but it does seem that despite whatever legitimate concerns you may have w/r/t those issues, you allow partisan loyalty to drive you to exploit legitimate concerns for political expediency - as we have seen on this thread, say in our discussion about torture.— Talking point sleuth
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: