Bill O'Reilly at Fox News has been peddling his immgrant crime wave bunk. There is no immigrant crime wave.

I've been pointing this out with statistics since 2007.

Crime is down in Arizona and even in border towns like El Paso.

I'm not sure who still listens to O'Reilly, but it's worth nipping this one in the bud.

Via DougJ, I read this Politico piece on the decline of Newsweek editor Jon Meacham's star:

Jon Meacham has had the kind of charmed professional life that other journalists can only envy: Newsweek managing editor at 29, editor at 37; author of four books, the latest, “American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House,” awarded the Pulitzer Prize last year in biography. So it was not without a certain schadenfreude that the media world seemed to take special relish in what turned out to be what his friend Sally Quinn called “a week from hell,” for Meacham some days short of his 41st birthday.

Personally, I never cared for Meacham's work, but he is not much worse or better than the rest of the Media. Pompous and tedious? Sure. But so is George Will. But I was struck by the silly reaction of Howard Fineman (admittedly an employee of Meacham's):

Last night on Hardball:

[CHRIS] MATTHEWS: Howard, is it possible that the actions of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party here will end up being counterproductive, that knocking [Blanche Lincoln] down, bringing her down below 50, making her fight for that runoff just weakens her for the general; she loses the general; they never come back in that state for years to come?

FINEMAN: I think it‘s quite possible, Chris. And I think they want to make a lesson. They want to teach somebody a lesson. I‘m not sure this is the right person or the right place to do it, because [Lincoln] was probably their best chance, the Democrats‘ best chance, of holding on to that seat there.

[. . . CHRIS] MATTHEWS: Great reporting there. Thank you, Howard Fineman.

Heh. Great reporting, my foot. An actual reporter would have taken the time to look at Lincoln's actual polling numbers and would have discovered that Lincoln has been a dead duck for many months now and that in fact Bill Halter has consistently polled better in the General Election than Lincoln. The Pollster.com summary tells the story. (See also this, this, this, and this.) But that's the great Beltway "reporting" you can expect.

Why do they overload Sunday nights with so many watchable programs?

There's a new Pacific, Nurse Jackie Celebrity Apprentice, Desperate Housewives and Brothers and Sisters. My favorite which I'm saving for last will be AMC's "Breaking Bad" when we find out what happened to Walt's brother-in-law Hank, the DEA agent who took a ton of bullets in a parking lot last week, right after he got fired for beating up meth cook Jesse and turned in his badge.

I hope you all enjoyed Mother's Day. I did -- "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" was really good, and if you read the book, you won't be disappointed.

It looks like Elena Kagen may be nominated for the Supreme Court tomorrow. At least she's not a former prosecutor. After John Roberts and Sam Alito, it's time for a change from that pattern.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

I really tired of Facebook months ago and stopped accepting friends I don't know and haven't heard of. I changed all my privacy settings to "friends only" or "just me" and deleted most of my "pages" and "causes." But I still don't trust it (and something about adding myself as a "fan" rather than a "friend" (required for those with over 5,000 friends) that just rubs me the wrong way.)

I don't like when people post their self-promotional material on my "wall." I don't like reading that x and y became friends. There's probably fewer than 50 friends whose postings and photos I'm interested in.

And now, there's more reason not to trust Facebook.

I wouldn't mind if Facebook crashed and burned, and took Linked In and all the others with them. They were entertaining for a while, but the negatives far outweigh the positives.

Anyone disagree?

Via dougj, I looked at this David Brooks column and was struck by this:

It is very hard for policy makers to use money to directly alter these viewpoints. In her book, “What Money Can’t Buy,” Susan E. Mayer of the University of Chicago calculated what would happen if you could double the income of the poorest Americans. The results would be disappointingly small. Doubling parental income would barely reduce dropout rates of the children. It would have a small effect on reducing teen pregnancy. It would barely improve child outcomes overall.

(Emphasis supplied.) Not having read the book, I am curious as to how these "calculations" were done. Obviously the scientific method of observation was not employed - we haven't doubled the income of poorest Americans. So how exactly were these "calculations" done?

Speaking for me only

I wrote last Tuesday that efforts to boycott AriZona Iced Tea were springing up on Twitter, and that they were misguided because the company is based in New York and has nothing to do with Arizona.

According to today's New York Times, the mainstream media caught it on Wednesday, the same day AriZona Iced Tea issued a statement attesting to its New York Roots.

Last year, AriZona Iced Tea participated in a tea sampling event in Arizona on May 5, to celebrate Cinco de Mayo. Sounds like their principles are in the right place.

Good thing for them they had people reading Twitter. Considering they are a privately held company, if this hadn't been caught in the bud, they could have faced some damage. Re-tweets would have spread the word to boycott like wildfire.

Bottom Line: Boycott Arizona but not AriZona.

George Will is concerned about 'outside agitators' telling Arizonans what to do. I wonder if Will thinks it is ok if an Arizona sheriff talks about it?

Pima County's top lawman says he has no intention of enforcing Arizona's controversial crackdown on illegal immigration. Sheriff Clarence Dupnik calls SB 1070 "racist," "disgusting," and "unnecessary."

You think Will plans to write a column about this? Me netiher.

Speaking for me only

George Will:

Arizonans should not be judged disdainfully and from a distance by people whose closest contacts with Hispanics are with fine men and women who trim their lawns and put plates in front of them at restaurants, not with illegal immigrants passing through their back yards at 3 a.m.

(Emphasis supplied.) As most of you probably know, I am Latino. And so is Markos. So are the members of the editorial board of La Opinion. So is Marco Rubio. So is Cesar Conda. And Jeb Bush wakes up next to a Latina.

Will should not project his own limited life experience with Latinos on to other people. BTW, the conservative Arizona Republic newspaper said "[n]ot since the dismal days of our nationally infamous fight over a holiday to honor the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., has the profile of Arizona descended this low." And Arizona Republican Hispanics said "SB 1070 is a direct slap in the face to Hispanic Americans who have fought and died for several American wars."

I suppose the experience with Latinos is different at Beltway cocktail parties.

Speaking for me only

The saga over the Apple employee's lost iPhone that was a prototype of the upcoming G4 version continues. Police have identified the person who found it in the bar, who may or may not be the person who sold it to Jason Chen, the Gizmodo/Gawker blogger/journalist. (Gizmodo is an online site run owned by Gawker. Chen has worked for them since 2006, writing hundreds of articles.)

At Apple's request, a criminal investigation was launched and a search warrant was issued and executed at Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home. He and his wife were out and police busted in and took several computers, servers and records.

Gawker protests, citing a CA shield law. The cops say they won't examine what what was taken until it's decided whether the shield law applies.

Why wouldn't it apply? [More...]

There was a a time when I wrote about the Media as much as anything. Now I almost never write about the Media. Mostly I suppose it is because it does not interest me anymore. But part of it is because I think it does not matter very much. Tom Friedman's ridiculous column on the Tea Partiers garnered a lot of ridicule. I do not question that the ridicule is appropriate. Indeed, Tom Friedman is the most ridiculous figure in the Media. But does Tom Friedman matter? Steve Benen writes:

One of the reasons I'm inclined to write about the Tea Partiers is that there are still many in the political establishment who believe the political mainstream should do more to take the Tea Party crowd and its hysterical cries seriously. [. . .] Thomas Friedman has a column today suggesting Tea Partiers strive to "become something more than just entertainment for Fox News."

Steve believes that Tom Friedman still matters. Does he? I seriously doubt it. Indeed, I ask for any evidence that anything Tom Friedman has written or said has affected the policy discourse since Iraq. Friedman provides fodder for ridicule. But little else. Ezra Klein is much more influential now imo.

Speaking for me only

Via angrymouse, this guy's picture. His words, however, are pathetically stupid and ignorant:

Now available at Bass Pro Shops: The Larry Summers lure

Posted by Thomas Mitchell [Editor of the Las Vegas Review Journal]

I baited the hook and dropped it in the water. It was swallowed hook, line and sinker, rod and reel, up to the elbow, in a piranha-like feeding frenzy. [. . .] They bit on the Larry Summers lure.

Before Larry Summers was an adviser to the president, he was the president of Harvard University, until one day he committed a cardinal sin. He offered an off-the-cuff conjecture that the reason women might be underrepresented in math and science at elite universities just might be because there is an “innate” difference between men and women. Whether there was even a grain of statistical, scientific or logical evidence to support such a statement was irrelevant.

(Emphasis supplied.) Heh. Yep, whether the then Harvard President's statements about why women were underrepresented in math and science fields was complete nonsense is irrelevant. This clown Mitchell deserves a show on Fox (Beck could not have done it better.) For his next column, I suggest he use the William Bennett lure. I'm sure he will crack himself up. My gawd, the man is the editor of a daily newspaper. What a disgrace.

Speaking for me only