« Is Clear Channel Communications Giving Their Listeners the Finger Again?
GOP Prez Wannabes: We Gots Dem Scheduling Conflict Blues Again, Mama »
Center of Attention
Nov 1st, 2007 | 6 responses
A round up of recent commentary by assorted voices who either attempt to strike a balanced note on heated debates and controversial issues, or improve our ability to find our own sense of balance by exposing us to new information and different points-of-view.
John Cole defends Hillary’s response re: Gov. Spitzer and licenses for illegals. (Speaking of licenses for illegals, did you know this?)
Patrick Joubert Conlon spotlights a terribly un-balanced definition of racism.
Prompted by developments in his city and state of residence, Dave Schuler offers 12 thoughts on taxation.
Jesse Walker spotlights an advocate with an intriguing rationale for greater government transparency.
Michael vdG offers a platform to a compelling voice on the punishment meted out yesterday to the Madrid bombers.
Is waterboarding torture? Capt. Fogg channels the perspective of Malcolm Nance, “a former master instructor and chief of training at the U.S. Navy Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School (SERE) in San Diego.”
Via Steve Clemons, we learn of yet another instance where Sen. Hagel is pushing a more balanced approach to foreign policy.
Jim Wallis opines on Mike Gerson’s “heroic conservatism” – a replacement label, it seems, for the punch-line Gerson’s former boss made of “compassionate conservatism.” (Call it heroic or compassionate, Billy Hollis sees the matter of government altruism through an entirely different lens.)
Ed Morrissey looks at the justice of allowing haters their free-speech … and then bankrupting them.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
6 Responses to “Center of Attention”
“Heroic conservatism” … “Virtue” … [gag]
Republicans are currently in trouble.
Ok, these posts seem to be open mic night at TMV so I’d like to ask a question. Why would be give licenses to illegal aliens? How does someone breaking the law get to register for something like this and not get deported? There is apparently just no one at INS that give a crap about their job. There needs to be no new laws on immigration we already have them. What there needs to be is enforcement of the existing laws and some heads cracked at INS. Or perhaps I just don’t understand the situation and someone could enlighten me a bit. I’m all ears as usual.
I don’t disagree with you, Sam. The point made by Spitzer and Jeb Bush is that they can’t get the illegals out or keep them from coming in without some further federal enforcement/clarity, then they might as well take steps to make them safer drivers. Twisted logic? Perhaps, but that’s what I found interesting about the featured points-of-view, collective attempts to help us seek our own sense of balance in the debate; i.e., illustrations that maybe Spitzer, and Hillary, and Jeb for that matter aren’t completely batsh** … or maybe they are.
This is similar to what we observe with advocacy of drug policy reform.
The State Department cannot get enough people to volunteer to go to Iraq, so it is beginning a policy of requiring (forcing) people to go there.
One more topic the principals on here might seize:
latest health care survey results