perpetrated by the politicians. Notice I said "politicians" and not "the Bush administration". Anyone who does not think that both parties are complicit in this issue is in denial. The democrats want illegal immigration to continue for the same reasons the republicans do. It benefits the businesses that underwrite their campaigns. It cannot escape any intelligent, even partially informed person that political donors most often donate to both parties.

Concerning the article, it is shameful that Ms. Molloy undermined her own story with rubbish like the following:

"...local activists and attorneys report that nearly 100 children were left stranded with baby sitters or in schools and daycare centers after one or both of their parents were detained."

Everyone knows that activists and attorneys will say anything that supports their cause, true or not. That she gives them credence here only serves to discredit. "Nearly 100" probably actually means a few, or none.

"That evening, a breast-feeding infant whose mother had been detained ended up in the E.R. with pneumonia and possible dehydration."

What? As a result of the raid? How can this be? A few hours without breast milk brought on pneumonia?. And will someone please point me to the medical book that defines "possible dehydration"? Why didn't she just say "possible bubonic plague"? I mean, any thing's possible. Statements like this indicates a desperate reach for vilification, when vilification can easily be provided by the real facts.

"I believe that [ICE] conducts these raids in a way that people are purposefully unable to exercise their rights," says Laura Rotolo, an attorney with the ACLU"

Quoting the ACLU, that bastion of truthiness...

"The raids in New Bedford and elsewhere are merely a stopgap solution that unfairly penalizes vulnerable workers in an already flawed system,"

The system is not flawed! Those that are enforcing it are flawed.

"The thing that everyone is waiting for is immigration reform," Tum says. "We came here to escape poverty, to allow our children to study and become educated ... We are not hiding. We are not trying to not pay our taxes. We are willing to do whatever it takes to comply with the law if we are given the opportunity to do that."

Dear Mr. Tum, you lying, criminal, self absorbed scumbag, if you are willing to do "whatever it takes to comply with the law", kindly go back to wherever you came from and apply for citizenship, like other law abiding immigrants have done. Until you do, the majority of the people in this country will be against you, as has been proven by the resistance to the latest amnesty bill.

Poco

I really like how you started out:

"In keeping with the stupid gamesmanship of primary politics, encouraged by the peanut gallery of the Washington press corps, they must magnify small differences and parse snipped phrases. And along with their flacks and surrogates, they must pretend that these sophomoric maneuvers have actual meaning for the making of American policy. Meanwhile, everyone involved is trying desperately to prove what tough weenies they are."

It's nice that you stripped the illusion of truth from the stupidity of what they are currently engaged in.

The rest of the article is pretty much crap.

Poco

some strips on the amazingly effective Pelosi/Murtha team. Four weeks and counting, Salon. Not a single article on the amazingly effective democrats.

Poco

That ditty is now occupying the tiny space where your brain used to be.

What's next, good natured hate? No wonder Salon is not considered a serious journalism site. Admit it Salon, a lot of your readers don't like Hillary Clinton. A lot of liberals don't like Hillary Clinton.

Five weeks and counting. Not one story about the amazingly effective democrat congress.

Poco

P.S. I am not a republican.

"Seriously?

how can you respond to an article about a 1975 autobiography with a statement that events in 2000 are too far in the past to be worth considering?

Because the 1975 autobiography was written by someone who is considering a run for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008. Which of the current candidates for President do you believe was disbarred in 2000?"

I seem to recall that Clinton (there is no significant political/identity difference between the two) is running in 2008. Too bad there is not a democrat or republican like Thompson today.

Eight weeks and counting - No stories about them amazingly effective democrats (Pelosi, Murtha, et al). Come on Salon, where are the tales of brilliant effectiveness? Was it 100 hours or 100 days... Hmmm. Maybe it was 100 years. Yeah, that's it.

Poco

P.S. I am not a republican. I am an equal opportunity despiser of all of the current politicians. Impeach Bush! Send Pelosi on a hunting trip with Cheney!

Next the NYT.

Remember when global cooling was going to plunge us into an ice age? (Ten years ago National Geographic documented this)

Remember when acid rain was going to kill every tree?

Remember when the thinning of the ozone layer was going to fry everyone? (the freon manufacturers made billions on that one)

Remember when population growth would all have us standing on a two square foot space of our own?

Remember when radon gas was going to kill everyone with a basement?

Remember when tooth fillings were poisoning everyone?

Remember when saccharin was causing cancer (proven false, but warnings are still mandated)

Remember when salt caused high blood pressure?

Remember when cell phones caused brain tumors?

Remember when chlorinated water caused birth defects?

Remember when catalytic converters turned automobile exhaust into "harmless CO2"?

Remember when Al Gore got famous for lying about global warming? (As vice president, he was simply infamous - think about how much money he and others are making off this.)

The bogeyman is not real, little children.

Poco

OK, this article is trash. No need to even read it.