kevin drum: Page 1
Tossing reality aside, James Ledbetter of Slate offers "Give Us Your Tired, Your Poor. Really. We Mean It /Economists are making the case politicians are afraid to: Immigration is great for the U.S." (slate.com/id/2265974).
Here are a few ways Ledbetter isn't in touch with the reality that the rest of us share:
If two "liberals" tell you that Wikipedia isn't biased towards the "liberal" side of things, doesn't that prove that it is biased, especially when the two "liberals" aren't exactly known for thinking things through?
OK, it's not proof, but it is a strong indicator, as Kevin Drum  approvingly directs our attention to the post from Eve Fairbanks  of the New Republic (also home to Jim Kirchik and Jason Zengerle). She discusses a subscriber-only National Review article (link) called "Liberal Web" which discusses liberal bias at WP, and says:
while I hadn't perceived anti-conservative bias on Wikipedia's political pages, I wanted to see if [John J. Miller] had picked up on something I didn't.
She then uses the fact that Miller only came up with two points to buttress her claim that there's no such bias. Obviously, she's engaging in a logical fallacy: just because Miller doesn't present more examples doesn't mean that there are no more examples and doesn't mean that better examples can't be found. And, in fact, many more can be found as I know from editing various WP pages from about 2004 to about 2007 when I basically gave up due to things such as perfectly reasonable, fact-based edits being constantly rolled back . In fact, I even created a site with a few examples at wikipediabias.com; note that there are many more that need to be added. Not all of the bias is of the "liberal" variety, such as that to be found at the Snopes entry.
And, it's perfectly understandable why there would be such bias due to the demographics of the web, which skews not just "liberal" and libertarian but also younger than the general population. Younger folks have more time to engage in editing wars, and those on the left side of things tend to be more activist than those on the right.
Wikipedia deletes, locks North American Union article
Google to just let Wikipedia control search results from now on
Liberals: Wikipedia not biased, Conservapedia a joke
AVWatch: will facts stick in Villaraigosa's Wikipedia entry?
How not to criticize Wikipedia
AVWatch: let's see how long facts stay in Villaraigosa's Wikipedia entry
Bloggers: stop linking to Wikipedia
"Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence"
Wikipedia's continual low credibility
 washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2008_04/013529.php
 I made a recent edit to the Bill Richardson entry, which was rolled back. I'm not going to get into a fight over it, but others might consider doing so: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bill_Richardson#controversies
Kevin Drum and/or the Washington Monthly have a habit of deleting perfectly reasonable comments; because of that you can't trust anything you read there. Comments sections serve as a form of check on the blogger or reporter; if they make a mistake someone will probably come along to point it out. If - like Kevin Drum and/or WM - they start deleting comments you never know what's missing, and it might be a comment offering a correction. So, every single thing he writes has to be double-checked before relying on it.
Washington Monthly ("WM"; Kevin Drum/Political Animal, washingtonmonthly. com) used to have an open commenting policy, and I've been posting the occasional and almost always critical comment at that site since Drum moved there and at his previous location (calpundit.com) since 2002 or 2003.
WM recently changed to some form of post-moderation of comments. Unlike almost everyone else who uses moderation, that includes the sleazy and underhanded tactic of editing comments without noting that they've been edited. In particular, adding extra characters to some URLs left in messages rendering them inoperable.
This has happened to me at least three times, once in January , again in February  and the second time earlier today (washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2007_03/010948.php), when a space character was inserted into a URL  in my comment (search for "TLB"), causing that link to generate a 404 (file not found message) and causing me to have to add a redirect rule into my .htaccess file. The comment is below. 
I don't know whether it's Kevin Drum or someone else who edits these comments, but Drum certainly knows about it. After the second incident I wrote him regarding it and he said it "probably" wouldn't happen again. He also mentioned that the person who did it may have been "annoyed"; whether he was refering to himself or someone else wasn't clear. He didn't raise any issues with the contents of any comments I left there. Note also that in December a comment I left there was deleted entirely.
Note also that two other URLs left in the comments on the latest thread were not modified, one to this page and another to this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Slepian
Clearly, as with those sites that have deleted comments I left or banned me entirely, they realize they don't have an argument and are forced to resort to playing sleazy games.
On the technical side of things, WM now uses the nofollow tag, meaning that all those who help WM create a "community" are doing so for free. Their older entries are clogged with spammm (example: washingtonmonthly. com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=8000). Meaning that they penalize legitimate commenters at the same time as they probably turn up in search results for spammmmy terms and generate click-through traffic for those spammmers. Anyone who links to their entries is linking to pages filled with spammm links and keywords.
On the wider issue, I was banned from RedState despite having posted almost 75 diary entries there over a one and a half year period. I've also been banned from ThinkProgress and QandO and I was banned from DailyKos back when he was just a solo blogger. And, I've had one or more comments deleted from MyDD (2), Think Progress, Brad DeLong, the New Haven Independent, Brothers Judd, the Arkansas Family Coalition, Media Matters for America (2, 3), John Kerry's blog, and, last but not least Blogs For Bush (example 1, 2). Obviously I'm doing something right.
~~~~~~~~ FOOTNOTES ~~~~~~~~
 In January a comment I left at washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2007_01/010513.php had the link in the following converted into gibberish:
Arnold is/was taking advice from someone linked to the MexicanGovernment. Details here. I don't expect Kevin Drum to understand this, but perhaps he should evaluate who Arnie is linked to, who he's being advised by, and who his plans will ultimately benefit before jumping on board. In February a comment I left at washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2007_02/010675.php had a link left in a comment changed from "lonewacko.com" to "lonewdfhsdfhaacko.com".
 The link http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/005911.html was changed to have a space character before the period.
I agree with our host about the 'hearts and minds' aspect, but he seems to have left a few things out of the equation. Many of those on the far-left think the U.S. is a bigger terrorist than, you know, the terrorists. Moderate Democrats don't exactly seem to be doing their part to reign in people like that.
On the wider issue, both the GOP and Dem leaderships are willing to put the U.S. at great risk out of fear of alienating their respective interest groups.
Recall that ChuckieSchumer pulled a web video about BorderControl simply because one or two Hispanic groups sent out press releases. Rather than taking them on, he capitulated. And, here's something most probably don't know either: HezbollahTerrrorists have infiltrated the U.S. over our porous SouthernBorder. That happened on Bush's watch, but you haven't heard any Democrats speak out about it.
Perhaps the GOP leadership should put the U.S. CofC on hold and think about protecting the U.S. And, perhaps the Dems should put the NationalCouncilofTheRace on hold and think about the same duty.
Kevin Drum informs us (washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2006_05/008869.php) that Sully is asking his readers to send in pictures from the windows of the cubicle whence they encumber the world with their thoughts.
Rather than provide my own, I decided to make a slight modification to the picture that Drum is good enough to provide. It's only a slight modification, so look closely:
La reconquista, a radical movement calling for Mexico to "reconquer" America's Southwest, has stepped out of the shadows at recent immigration-reform protests nationwide as marchers held signs saying, "Uncle Sam Stole Our Land!" and waved Mexico's flag.Unfortunately, Bustamecha is still Lt. Gov., although he's kept a low profile since his defeat.
Even as organizers urged marchers to display U.S. flags, the theme of reclaiming "stolen" land remained strong. One popular banner read: "If you think I'm illegal because I'm a Mexican, learn the true history because I'm in my homeland." ...A three-minute videotape made by the Immigration Watchdog Web site plays speeches by Hispanic professors and elected officials making references to Aztlan and the idea of a demographic takeover.
"We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population," Jose Angel Gutierrez, political science professor at the University of Texas at Arlington, said on the videotape.
In an interview, Mr. Gutierrez said there was "no viable" reconquista movement. He blamed interest in the issue on closed-border groups and "right-wing blogs" such as American Patrol and L.A. Watchdog, but those Web sites are getting plenty of ammunition from groups like La Voz de Aztlan, a Whittier, Calif.-based news service that advocates a separatist state while criticizing Jews and "gringos."
Then there's the Mexica Movement, which wants to "reconstruct" the United States as an "indigenous" nation called Anahuac. Professor Charles Truxillo of the University of New Mexico envisions a sovereign Hispanic nation called the Republica del Norte that would encompass Northern Mexico, Baja California, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
MEChA, an acronym for the Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan, has come under fire for revolutionary language in its "El Plan de Aztlan," a founding document that declares "the independence of our mestizo nation," decries the "brutal gringo invasion," and says that land "rightfully ours will be fought for and defended."
What's notable about MEChA is its otherwise mainstream image. Most Hispanic leaders, including Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, belonged to MEChA in high school or college. Former Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante came under fire from conservatives for refusing to renounce his membership during the 2003 gubernatorial race...
A review of a United Arab Emirates-owned company's plan to take over a portion of operations at key U.S. ports never looked into whether the company had ties to al Qaeda or other terrorists, a key Republican lawmaker told CNN on Wednesday.
The Coast Guard - at least initially - had questions on the deal (thinkprogress. org/2006/02/27/coast-guard-warnings-ports). The USCG says that it had all its questions answered by various intelligence agencies.
That causes Bush cheerleader Insty (instapundit. com/archives/028853.php) to once again ask what the problem could be. As does co-idiot Kevin Drum: washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2006_02/008310.php
And (crooksandliars. com/2006/02/27.html#a7324):
Lou Dobbs reported today that "Dubai Ports World" officials have tried to silence him and get CNN to suppress his reports... Mark Dennis, spokesman for Dubai Ports World: "CNN won't shut up Lou Dobbs." ...They are refusing to give any more interviews to CNN or allow them to video tape their operations overseas. To CNN's credit they have refused to comply with their demands.
Instapundit reports (instapundit. com/archives/028764.php) that the port deal was much ado about nothing. Whew! I'm relieved that we don't need to worry about yet more Bush administration corruption and attempts to sell this country out to the globalist agenda. Everyone: relax!
Extra-special bonus: co-idiot Kevin Drum weighs in: washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2006_02/008279.php
Thanks to Betsy's Page, I learned that Hugh Hewitt's yet-to-be-published book Blog is climbing the Amazon sale ranks, breaking the Top 1000 and then the Top 500 today. I received a recent draft of the book last week and finished it...
Good for you!
Intrigued, I clicked over to Hugh's site. Unfortunately, it's not as bad as I'd hoped:
A year ago you had probably not heard of Powerline, KerrySpot, INDC Journal, BlogsforBush, the Belmont Club, LGF, Jeff Jarvis, RadioBlogger, One Hand Clapping, Shot in the Dark, Beldar, RatherBiased, Professor Bainbridge, VodkaPundit, TriGeekDreams, Scrappleface, Bill Hobbes, Blackfive, RedState, Matt Yglesias, Kevin Drum, RightWingNews, JohnMarkReynolds, PoliPundit, The Fourth Rail, StonesCryOut, CadetHappy, BrainShavings, Al Mohler, Betsy's Page, Smash, Patrick Ruffini, Captain's Quarters, Wizbang... (This is my "must visit at least weekly" list, along with others named above or below.)
I've never heard of a few of those, and, except for a few of the rest I think we'd all be better off if most of them would just go rest on their laurels.
Have you noticed that gas prices have been coming down a bit lately? What do my regular commentators think about this? Could it be part of Bush's reelection plans? If I were skeptical, I'd think that Bush's oil company buddies had raked in enough money and now, in a desperate attempt to get him elected, are lowering the prices.
Fellow blogger "Lonewacko" informs me that on his 'Blogging Across America' tour, he was almost ecstatic to pay $1.50 a gallon in Elkton, MD about 10 months back. But, then he got to western Virginia and he paid the lowest price he paid during the whole trip: $1.36 per gallon. Imagine that!
Lonewacko also informs me that the Arco station at Fletcher and Riverside - right off the 5 - is at $2.01*, and there are reportedly other L.A. area gas stations even a little lower. After paying almost $2.50, breaking the $2 mark is going to seem like a miracle.
Why, it's almost as if Bush planned it this way... What do you guys think?
P.S. I'll have a special, 194 page report on President Bush's ANG records tomorrow, and it'll be required reading!
*It comes at a price however. They used to have a soft serve ice cream machine and - whatever you want to call me that I am - I moved the tray that was under the nozzle and designed to catch dripping ice cream... Anyway, so there was this metal tray there and I slid it out so I could keep filling up the ice cream cone as high as it would go. They told me if I did that again they'd have to charge me extra. That caused a bit of bad blood.
Help! We told our artist to draw an artist's conception of a car that can show feelings. But, our offshore artist made a mistake. Can you spot it?
Last week, the Bush campaign e-mailed a 78-second video to millions of supporters that included images of Adolf Hitler amid a stream of Democrats inveighing against the president.To which, the Captain has this to say:
Ensuing protests over the video's use of images of the Nazi dictator led Bush aides to add a 20-second disclaimer saying the Hitler clips had first been used against him by liberal opponents.
This, of course, is a lie, although Anderson does not bother to point it out. The clips are from an ad that was submitted to a MoveOn contest and then specifically rejected and denounced by MoveOn, so the Hitler images were first used by "liberal opponents" only if "liberal opponents" means "some guy with access to the internet."Let's take a trip through the Drudge archives and see what we can find.
First, we get Margaret Cho at a MoveOn fundraiser from Jan. 14, 2004 (not 2003 as the text says):
"Despite all of this stupid bullsh-- that the Republican National Committee, or whatever the f--- they call them, that they were saying that they're all angry about how two of these ads were comparing Bush to Hitler? I mean, out of thousands of submissions, they find two. They're like fu--ing looking for Hitler in a hawstack. You now? I mean, George Bush is not Hitler. He would be if he fu--ing applied himself." big, extended applause) "I mean he just isn't."OK, so that doesn't have much to do with the videos, other than pointing out that comparisons between Bush and Hitler are considered comedy material by the MoveOn crowd.
Moving on, this entry (Jan. 4) refers to the first Bush-Hitler video, but only after it had been removed. However, that was before MoveOn's apology.
The next day (Jan. 5), Drudge finds that a second Bush-Hitler ad had been streamed on MoveOn's site: "THE NEW HITLER SPOT FEATURED THE GRAPHIC 'SPONSORED BY MOVEON.ORG.'" (I saved the MoveOn finalists, and none of them had that same graphic. People can claim things that aren't true. Or, perhaps it was truly sponsored by MoveOn.)
Two days later (Jan. 7), Drudge has this to say:
NEW VIDEO UNCOVERED: MOVEON.ORG FINALIST IS PRODUCER OF ANOTHER BUSH/HITLER ADThe Bush-Hitler ads were "specifically rejected" by MoveOn only after they received complaints. Whether MoveOn's management was aware of them before receiving complaints is still an open question.
Wed Jan 07 2004 17:06:59 ET One of the finalists of the MoveOn.org ad contest is responsible for another heinous web video that compares Bush to Hitler, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
An ad by "Take Back the Media" is one of 15 Finalists in MoveOn.org's Bush in 30 Seconds Commercial Contest. The ARMY OF ONE flash animation has been chosen out of over 1000 submission by nearly 3 million votes online.
But currently streaming on the Take Back site with ARMY OF ONE is another shocking advert -- alleging Bush/Nazi ties!
Screengrabs of MoveOn's site or of discussion forums could be of use if we want to find out what they knew when. Their complete innocence in the matter - such as that proferred by Kevin Drum - is still open to debate.
And, still unexplained is why there were 15 finalists, but they were numbered 1 through 17 with two empty spaces.
The guest post is reasonable, and suggests that "liberals" encourage the creation of a "religious center-left:"
But I'd feel a lot better if our side spent less time running down the religious right, and more time building a religious center-left. After all, those who fought for civil rights in the '60s saw standing up for their political convictions as a natural extension of their religious convictions. Reverend Martin Luther King filled the Mall with a sermon.OK, let's forget for the moment that the reason he mentioned the Mall was because of the recent march for abortion.
Anyhoo, do I need to tell you how it turned out? Here are some sample comments:
religion has generally been a negative influence on human history and America would be a more liberal, just place if religious expressions in politics died out entirely.There are some reasonable comments. At least, as of post time.
...No wonder the DLC has be marginalised by most upstanding liberals...
...Can we please lay off this religion bullshit? Great waste of a "guest post" spot. Can it... [from perennial favorite "Dave"]
"Captain" Kevin Drum sets to sea in a quest (washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2004_04/003720.php) to determine what holds us "conservatives" together. Why do we think this way? Is there any way to prevent us from thinking this way? Can we somehow be taught to think the right way?