Well, one thing I found out about when I got back was that ol' Rob Smith had gone on to his reward. I had corresponded with Rob on several occasions, and despite his blog persona as a person of profanely irreverent vulgarity (or vulgarly irreverent profanity, or irreverently profane vulgarity, or whatever), he actually was a man of principle and more decent than 90% of the people filling church pews on any given Sunday. And even when he was steeping in a kettle full of liquor, he could still write better and funnier than authors who'd sold shelves full of books. He was a complicated fellow, and I can't say that I will ever understand everything about him or why he made some of the decisions he made, but whatever he was, he was with no apologies. Guys like Rob don't come around in this world often, which some of you might find comforting. But when you need help, the Robs of the world are who you want on your side--no greater friend, no worse enemy.
In other items of interest that I missed, there was the conviction in Federal court of one of our former governors, and the founder and former CEO of one of the nation's largest healthcare and rehabilitation providers. From all the various news reports I've read since then, it seems that the jury understood their charge very well and weren't swayed by all the irrelevant grandstanding and preaching by the defendants. I was a bit perplexed that the other two defendants walked free and clear, but again, given what is being reported in the paper, it wasn't an arbitrary decision by the jury but one based on actually trying to get things done. They did their job as well as anyone could, it seems, and should be commended.
I thought it was interesting that the jurors opened each day of deliberations with a prayer--I have to believe that this has at least been talked about on the defense side as a possible issue on appeal--not a good reason, but just something to argue about to say that the jurors were unduly influenced by emotionalism rather than by evidence. Of course, I can't imagine that the defense would actually go forward with such a ploy, given how they portrayed themselves as being some sort of quasireligious civil rights martyrs right up there with Dr. King. But you never know.
I do know that after the verdict, both Siegelman and Scrushy made the rounds of all the local news shows and jabbered to the newspapers in a series of remarkable displays of petty bitterness--the same jury that Siegelman expansively claimed wouldn't even give him a parking ticket was now a group of people who were misled and not able to see through the prosecution's weak case. Make up your mind, there, Sparky.
I thought this Siegelman quote was precious:
[...] "If I'm in trouble for this, every public official who has ever taken money and appointed that person to a board, agency or commission is up the creek without a paddle" [...]
As a taxpayer in the State of Alabama, all I can say is "good." Bring it on, and faster please! I'm not sure if Dandy Don actually thinks Alabamians WANT their elected representatives doing business they way 'it's always been done,' but I know I don't.ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE--Boy, that Kim Jong-Il is one weird, creepy little dude. Therefore, I figure there is approximately a 98% chance that Cindy Sheehan will be seen at some point in the coming months snuggled up by his side to issue a joint denunciation of that lying King George McHitlerburton.
In immigration, this odd article from the Christian Science Monitor. Being that the media seem to have given up on even pretending to be dispassionate, this little hatchet job is intended to do nothing more than promote knee-jerk opposition to ANYthing President Bush does or says, using the old trick of comparing a predecessor's success to today's seeming lack. BUT, the paper goes to far as to promote something that were it ACTUALLY to be proposed by the Bush Administration NOW, would cause the self-same paper to explode into a cannonade of confetti about how evil and vicious and lying and wicked and lying and evil and racist the whole Bushco gang is. Read the article--is the CSM's writer ACTUALLY advocating that the U.S. embark on Operation Wetback 2?
[...] Influential politicians, including Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D) of Texas and Sen. Pat McCarran (D) of Nevada, favored open borders, and were dead set against strong border enforcement, Brownell said. But General Swing's close connections to the president shielded him – and the Border Patrol – from meddling by powerful political and corporate interests.
One of Swing's first decisive acts was to transfer certain entrenched immigration officials out of the border area to other regions of the country where their political connections with people such as Senator Johnson would have no effect.
Then on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.
By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.
By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.
Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.
Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.
The sea voyage was "a rough trip, and they did not like it," says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.
Mr. Coppock says he "cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox." [...]
General Swing's fast-moving campaign soon secured America's borders – an accomplishment no other president has since equaled. Illegal migration had dropped 95 percent by the late 1950s. [...]
While Congress debates building a fence on the border, these veterans say other actions should have higher priority. [And seemingly so does the author of the piece, seeing as he voices absolutely no counterbalancing arguments. Ed.]
1. End the current practice of taking captured Mexican aliens to the border and releasing them. Instead, deport them deep into Mexico, where return to the US would be more costly.
2. Crack down hard on employers who hire illegals. Without jobs, the aliens won't come.
3. End "catch and release" for non-Mexican aliens. It is common for illegal migrants not from Mexico to be set free after their arrest if they promise to appear later before a judge. Few show up. [...]
Hey, I don't have any answers either, but there's no use pretending that this article is anything more than just another attempt by a partisan press to poke at the current Administration.
Finally--tires. Man, how I love tires.
Posted by Terry Oglesby at July 7, 2006 09:09 AM