Blue Crab Boulevard

As Clint Taylor points out, defenders of Yale in many venues are Yale students or alumni who are, with or without coordination, using an "us against them" strategy. Casting the objections of people (like me) who don't think it's right for a taliban mouthpiece to be a student at Yale as "outsiders" who are just ganging up on poor, old Yale. Those who disapprove, then, are somewhat (or completely) lacking in credibility. Because they are "outsiders" and not fit to judge the likes of Yale. One opinion piece said outside commenters were "ossified", another said outsiders had no knowledge of history, another that outsiders had no expertise therefore denigrated true (Yale) expertise.

Ah, well. Some of us, who are "outsiders" to Yale, may actually have a bit of knowledge and expertise. It may not be the superior, Yale flavored expertise or knowledge, but it's something. You see, some of us were taught that it did not matter where you came from or where you were lucky enough to go to school. We were taught to think some inalienable rights were given to each of us. Including the right not to be silenced by those who think of themselves as our betters. That is exactly what comes across when the argument of "outsiders" is used. That is a tactic to shut down discussion, not an actual argument.

Regardless, the institution that is Yale has a long history. One that should bring pride to those who are lucky enough to have attended. Thinking people do not denigrate others because of where they were born or where they were educated. Thinking people do not judge people by their economic status, or by their race.  Thinking people do, and should, judge others by their actions and the company they keep.

To those who defend Yale for the decision to admit Mr. Hashemi, there is one question that needs to be answered. Do you understand the nature of good and evil?

Not in religious terms, but in absolute terms? Is one who apologizes for evil any better than one who commits the evil?

This is one of the Buddhas at Bamiyan, Afghanistan. It was built in the 4th century:

The Taliban decided, after all the centuries the Buddhas stood there, that they must be destroyed, like this:

(CNN)

Mr. Hashemi defended the regime that did this. He defended acts like this, and much worse - acts against living people rather than statues that were once a part of humanity's shared heritage.

Who exactly are the outsiders?

That every time I read one of these MSM screeds against blogs and bloggers, it's directed at the more right leaning blogs? In saying that, I am not trying to say that some bloggers jumped the gun. I didn't read any personally, but I am quite sure some did. Some bloggers undoubtedly called Jill Carroll all kinds of names. This blog was not one of them.

But I routinely read extreme, vicious comments and posts on some of the lefty blogs, too. Why has there never (to my knowledge) been any calls by the MSM for people like Kos when he says "screw them" about fellow Americans being killed and their bodies hung from bridges? Why no calls for blogs on the left to stop it when they go overboard? Or apologize when they trumpet something that turns out to be false?

That said, are there some bloggers who should apologize? I would guess yes there are. They should, too.

But should all bloggers be smeared because of a few who did jump the gun? Maybe that's just human nature. I tend to think pretty badly about the bulk of the MSM because of (quite) a few bad actions lately. Does that mean all reporters are bad. Not at all. There are some really good ones. When I point out the bad ones I guess it's easy to generalize that I hate all of them. I don't.

Blogging is actually a bit harder than it would appear to a reporter for a traditional MSM outlet. We are subject to instant fact checking and instant feedback. And commenters can be quite vehement in their choice of words (you should have seen the ones that got nuked). I honestly try to fact check and find alternate sources for a lot of things, I also sometimes try to make jokes, or just shoot something out in an offhand way. Ultimately, I alone, not a big network or newspaper, have to answer for what I write. If I do it right, people will come back and read what I have to say. If I don't they will not return.

It does bother me that this kind of MSM article seems to be directed only at one part of the blogosphere.

If there is still a hole in the boat. First you plug the hole.

Charles Krauthammer has a column up in the WaPo in which he says:

Build a barrier. It is simply ridiculous to say it cannot be done. If one fence won't do it, then build a second 100 yards behind it. And then build a road for patrols in between. Put in cameras. Put in sensors. Put out lots of patrols.

Can't be done? Israel's border fence has been extraordinarily successful in keeping out potential infiltrators who are far more determined than mere immigrants. Nor have very many North Koreans crossed into South Korea in the past 50 years.

Of course it will be ugly. So are the concrete barriers to keep truck bombs from driving into the White House. But sometimes necessity trumps aesthetics. And don't tell me that this is our Berlin Wall. When you build a wall to keep people in, that's a prison. When you build a wall to keep people out, that's an expression of sovereignty. The fence around your house is a perfectly legitimate expression of your desire to control who comes into your house to eat, sleep and use the facilities. It imprisons no one.

He's got it exactly right - and it's what I have been saying all along. First stop the flood, then start working out what to do with the people already here. Allowing them amnesty first will make the flood a tidal wave.

UPDATE: Opinion Journal has an editorial arguing the exact opposite. I disagree with this one. Their argument is that closing the border will hurt the economy. I think that's wrong; closing the border will give us control of the factors they bring in. The argument that the low paid jobs will disappear and go overseas is, well, stupid in this context. Waiters take long enough already, them being overseas won't improve things. Sending dishes to be washed in China isn't cost effective. They have some good points, but nothing that proves a fence will not be a good thing. We need to get control of the leak before we bail.

Part of the problem trying to argue politics these days is the lack of civility. Too many times things devolve into rants going back and forth, the parties involved all talking past one another. Part of it stems from extreme positions, part of it from coming at an issue from completely different starting points. Part of it is lack of non-verbal feedback (in internet discussions).

But what really hurts the process is speakers who use completely over the top verbal imagery to whip up the troops.

Tom Elia over at The New Editor points to a Kos diary giving a lot of quotes from Joseph Wilson. The quotes are such that I frankly thought they were a joke at first. But I checked Kos. They're real. It leads me to one conclusion.

Joseph Wilson is a complete loon.

Using statements like "Drive stakes through their hearts" is so completely beyond acceptable I can't even begin to write how angry that makes me. This is irresponsible, Mr. Wilson.

And I don't tolerate it from any wing, right or left, before any lefties ride to Joe's defense.  

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit has links to other people, including lefties who are disgusted by Wilson. Please let Joe's 15 minutes be over. He has a stink about him….

Real Clear Politics is saying that Mitt Romney's chances to get the nomination for president are excellent following the announcement of a deal on health insurance in Massachusetts. I have only heard some fairly vague reports on this plan to date, but it sounds interesting at least. I'd like to see the details before I judge it, though. I'd also like to see how well it operates for a while. Unintended consequences are a way of life any time a new law is passed.

If anyone has a pointer to details (not a media capsule report) I'd like to get that.

Incidentally, I was not aware that Romney was a Mormon.

The Washington Post is looking to hire two bloggers, one from the left and one from the right. This is to replace the short-lived Ben Domenech at the Post. (I did not comment on that ruckus since I had never once read anything the guy had written).

Since we here at Blue Crab Boulevard have been getting called all kinds of names today in our comment sections, all accusing us of being a right-wing blog, but the National Journal Blogometer called us a lefty blog, we modestly submit that the WaPo could hire us to fill both of these slots. We'd accept both salaries, of course.

We're waiting for your call, Mr. Brady. Do hurry, we're late for an appointment.

I'm not a big fan of Ann Coulter. She's a bit to strident for my tastes, although she occasionally has some good points. (I see them when people point them out, but never read her otherwise).

Earlier today, I told a commenter that I had never quoted her. I am changing that right now. I have to quote this, not because Ann Coulter said it, but because it's probably one of the best put downs I have heard recently:

"Would you rather sleep with Ann Coulter or Dianne Feinstein?" Elle magazine asks the actor in a raunchy interview.

"I gotta go with Feinstein," Kim Basinger's ex answers. "With Coulter, we'd have sex and I'd have to jump out the window. I wouldn't even get dressed."

Yesterday, Coulter told Lowdown: "That's the only reason I can think of for wanting to have sex with Alec Baldwin."

Ouch. Game, set and match.

H/T LGF for the link.

A chiropractor from Ohio is being investigated by state authorities because of his unorthodox methods. James Burda of Athens, Ohio claims to be able to go back in time and correct a problem by fixing the original injury.

He calls his method "Bahlaqeem." Burda says it is a made up word with no other meaning.

The (Ohio State Chiropractic) board alleges in three counts against Burda that the treatment is unacceptable and constitutes "willful and gross malpractice." Burda has until May 1 to request a hearing. The board can levy penalties ranging from a reprimand to revoking his license to practice, said Kelly Caudill, the board's executive director.

Caudill said she could not discuss the board's allegations while the investigation continues and could not comment on whether any of Burda's patients had complained. She said the board began the investigation when it learned of Burda's Web site. Burda said he likely will seek a hearing.

The time traveling chiropractor runs a website offering the "service" and says 100% satisfaction is guaranteed.

Oh - the post title? It's a made up word meaning (insert your own definition here).

A reporter has been caught in a sting operation attempting to extort $220,000 in exchange for NOT reporting false information!

The shakedown began with a series of e-mails sent last month by Stern to Burkle.

It reached a boiling point more than an hour into the first meeting after Stern outlined various ways Burkle could buy protection on the gossip page.

An exasperated Burkle finally said, "How much do you want?" after Stern said he could control coverage by Richard Johnson, the column's chief writer, and his staff. "Um, $100,000 to get going and then you could get it to me on a month-to-month, maybe like $10,000," replied Stern.

"Okay, that's a great deal," said Burkle, the subject of numerous Page Six items including a "date" with supermodel Gisele Bundchen, meetings with other women and a nasty breakup with a longtime lover.

Wow. Just wow. Pay me not to make up lies about you on a gossip page. Wow.

UPDATE: This may NOT be quite what it appears to be and I may have jumped the gun. It appears that Jared Paul Stern, the accused reporter is saying HE was the victim of a setup and the Mr. Burkle leaked the information that generated the original story I reported after the FBI decided it did not have enough evidence to prosecute. This is developing. A sure sign that something is weird here is that Huffington Post has come out squarely against Stern because Mr. Stern's employer is Rupert Murdoch owner of Fox News as well.

Here's an AP report that actually notes there is good news in the economy. Improving jobs numbers are a big help. One of the things I did not see in this report was the usual "big black cloud" behind the silver lining type wording. You know, the "Job gains fueled consumer confidence, BUT there are concerns about…..

Nice change from what has become the norm. More straight reports, please.