Sandy Berger will plead guilty to taking classified documents from the National Archives, Fox News is reporting. Although he “inadvertently” took some papers, he “knowingly” crammed others down his pants. So he meant to steal only a few things. OK. Too bad it’s only a misdemeanor.
As I wrote back in July 2004, Samuel “Sandy” Berger Won’t Go To Jail…
Michelle Malkin has a great post.
Update (4/1): Power Line says Another Successful Cover-Up.
Scrappleface: “Ex-Clinton administration national security advisor Samuel ‘Sandy’ Berger entered a Virginia hospital today suffering from an “acute skin inflammation on his wrists” minutes after learning of the punishment he’ll face for smuggling top-secret documents out of the National Archives.”
More from Malkin.
There are documents still missing! Bunch of crooks.
Liberal blogger Kevin Drum on Sandy Berger: “Bizarre and inexplicable.”
Lorie Byrd: “When I first read of the Berger theft of documents I was amazed that such a thing could happen in a facility that is responsible for classified documents. Now I am amazed that a former NSA appears likely to get away with pilfering and destroying classified documents with a slap on the wrist.”
Around the web: Confederate Yankee, Reformed Politics, Pajama Hadin, Outside the Beltway, Captain’s Quarters, Wizbang, Sierra Faith, GOP Bloggers, The Political Teen (video), Michael King, Alternaview, Michelle Malkin, HyScience, JackLewis.net, Mudville Gazette, ARGGHHH!, The Anchoress…
More bloggers: Three Bad Fingers, Jackson’s Junction, Blogical Conclusions, Polipundit (and here), Jeff Jarvis, Right Wing News, Don Singleton, Scott Ott, Wittenberg Gate, Bird’s Eye View, HCS and Gen’s Pad, Double Toothpicks, Kobayashi Maru, Biblical Christianity, Chaos Central, Adrian Warnock, Air Force Voices, My Sandmen, Sisu, Jerry McClellan, Baldilocks, Lifelike Pundits, MartiniPundit…
Previous obituaries: Johnnie Cochran, Ossie Davis, Johnny Carson, Shirley Chisholm, Rick James, Ronald Reagan and Superman.
Update: Hating the “Religious Right”
Update II: Kate Adamson, a woman once diagnosed as being in a Persistent Vegetative State, will be on Larry King Live tonight. Dory at Wittenberg Gate interviewed her.
Update III (4/1): James White, my favorite Christian apologist, travels across the country debating on such topics as the doctrine of the trinity, solo scriptura, predestination, papal infallibility, etc. He also won Best Overall Evangelical Blog in the 2005 Evangelical Blog Awards. Yesterday he blogged about Terri Schiavo. It’s a must-read.
Check out the Blogs4God round-up.
Significant numbers of people were outraged in 1973, when the Supreme Court placed its “holy” imprimatur on the murder of babies in the womb and overstepped its bounds by tying up states on the issue through a constitutional right it manufactured.But over the last several decades, despite a virtual monopoly by leftist forces in academia, the major media and Hollywood, the public’s sentiment toward protecting babies in utero has matured, and its aversion to judicial activism has grown.
People have a sense, if not any particular sophistication in constitutional analysis, that there is something radically wrong with the Orwellian propaganda that “social change” ought to emanate from the courts rather than legislative bodies.
My segment on MSNBC today is tentative. The Michael Jackson/Jesse Jackson radio interview has turned into old news. I may appear to discuss something else or not at all. I’ll keep you posted.
Update: Looks like I’ll do a blogosphere round-up (including posts about Michael Jackson) today at 5:00 p.m. EST. It will probably be closer to 5:20, but once again, I’ll keep you posted. Leave your tips in the comment section.
On Monday I wrote about blog envy, one of my favorite topics. I don’t think bloggers and journalists have to be enemies, however. I believe there’s enough common ground between us to benefit both. There’s nothing to be afraid of, MSM. 
Glenn Reynolds makes a similar observation here. Jeff Jarvis says, “Journalism is a verb, not a noun.”
I say, “Get that man some trackbacks!”
Update: Hey now. I should do one of these. LBC’s top 20 favorite blogs?
Update II (3:49 p.m.): See you kids later when I return with the MSNBC after-report.
Update III (6:07 p.m.): The Political Teen (Media Player) and Trey Jackson (Media Player and Quicktime) both have video of today’s blog round-up. Featured today were about twenty too many “Ahs” (Got to work on that) and my new laptop. 
I briefly mentioned the GOP Talking Points Memo scandal, border issues and FrankJ’s proposal to SarahK.
LBC was featured today on CNN’s new blog report segment (Trey Jackson’s video). They quoted from the post below this one, Blogger Gets Burned:
[E]ditors are invaluable. Journalists have that advantage over bloggers. If a reporter gets wind of hot story, he has to confirm sources before the story goes to press. Sometimes the editors goof as well, but at that point the blame also falls on the editor, too. Misery (in being duped by anonymous sources) loves company…[I]f bloggers want to be journalists, we should strive to be better than journalists. Joshua retracted, but the so-called journalists have not.
Catch Michelle Malkin on O’Reilly tonight discussing the ACLU’s opposition to the Minuteman Project volunteers. Trey “Action” Jackson has the video.
Update IV (3/31): I don’t know what to think. Good?
It happens. You stumble upon a juicy bit of information that can’t be confirmed. You want to post it but hesitate. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. You blog it anyway, and it turns out to be wrong.
It happens to journalists, especially journalists who hate George Bush. CBS producers could not authenticate memos they said proved Bush received preferential treatment in the Texas Air National Guard. On top of that, their star witness had been caught lying to them. But they still ran with the story. Journalists were recently duped again. Back on March 20, the Washington Post made reference to “a memo distributed only to Republican senators” regarding Terri Schiavo. No one can verify where the memo came from or whether it’s authentic, but for days afterward MSM wrote about it as if it were genuine.
I wrote about the whole mess on Saturday, citing Joshua Claybourn’s efforts. Well, it turns out Joshua was duped, too. I wrote that he talked to “Senate staffers who claim that an aide to Democratic senator Harry Reid distributed to memo.” He even named the Reid staffer in his post. Joshua has retracted the post because he’s been unable to confirm the accusations, and the Senate staffers are “nowhere to be found.”
What most of us didn’t know was that the so-called staffers didn’t tell Joshua their names. Not even alias, I presume. He writes:
I’m disturbed and upset, both with those who anonymously made the accusation and myself for posting it without more judicious restraint. Inevitably someone will accuse me of hypocrisy and that’s a fair criticism. But I have retracted the sloppy reporting on my part and am willing to note the errors; that is much more than ABC or the Washington Post can say.
When things like this happen, editors are invaluable. Journalists have that advantage over bloggers. If a reporter gets wind of hot story, he has to confirm sources before the story goes to press. Sometimes the editors goof as well, but at that point the blame also falls on the editor, too. Misery (in being duped by anonymous sources) loves company.
Michelle Malkin, journalist and blogger, knows both worlds, and she offers Joshua some advice:
For obvious reasons, claims made by a completely anonymous source must be regarded as far less reliable than those made by a source who is willing to disclose his or her identity to a reporter or blogger.I often use sources who don’t want their names published, but I never publish information provided by anonymous tipsters unless I can independently verify the information.
Claybourn was careless. He had better hope that the Reid aide he accused of wrongdoing doesn’t sue him for libel.
That’s what it all comes down to. If bloggers want to be journalists, we should strive to be better than journalists. Joshua retracted, but the so-called journalists have not.
Addendum: Michelle has been all over media critic Howard Kurtz for not doing his job: criticizing the media. He finally bites (reg. req.). Michelle also does an excellent job calling out so-called journalists who have not retracted their stories about the “GOP memo.”
Ed Morrissey: “Kurtz once again acts as an apologist rather than an objective news critic, yet another disappointment he can add to his non-coverage of the Eason Jordan scandal.”
Update (2:26 p.m.): I just read Howard Kurtz’s column in its entirety. I have three words for the journalists who first reported on the so-called GOP Talking Points Memo: Sloppy, sloppy and sloppy!
I thought his client was guilty. Got away with the murder of two people. But no one can say Johnnie Cochran didn’t zealously represent him. Johnnie Cochran is dead at 67:
Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., the charismatic attorney who became famous in the successful defense of football star O.J. Simpson on murder charges, died on Tuesday in Los Angeles of a brain tumor, spokespeople said.
Cochran began his career as a crusader against police abuses, often in cases involving black clients, but is best known for the trial that won a controversial acquittal for Simpson on murder charges in 1995.
More from My Way News.
Previous obituaries: Ossie Davis, Johnny Carson, Shirley Chisholm, Rick James, Ronald Reagan and Superman.
Other bloggers: Wizbang…
Update (3/30): I think former cop Mark Fuhrman got a raw deal, but he had only himself to blame. While testifying for the prosecution in O.J. Simpson’s trial, Furhman was asked if he ever used the word “nigger,” and he lied. “No.”
Who hasn’t ever used that word? It was a needless lie that ruined his career and reputation. It was much worse than the truth. Regardless, I think Fuhrman is doing a great job with his independent investigations and books. I highly recommend Murder in Greenwich: Who Killed Martha Moxley? and Murder in Brentwood.
John Lott discusses some of the pros and cons of using different standards for hiring police officers. His assessment is much more balanced than one I would give, but he makes a few good points. For instance, women and blacks are important for certain types of undercover work. And female victims may feel more comfortable talking to female officers.
Here’s where things get sticky: “The problem is that because of large differences in strength and size between men and women, different standards are applied to ensure that there are more female officers,” Lott writes. If anyone told me that men and women had to meet the same physical requirements while training at a police academy, I’d have to call that person a liar.
Lott wisely or unwisely, depending on your point of view, glosses over the exam pass rates between blacks and whites and focuses on the relatively weaker physical strength of women compared to men. Thankfully and rationally, he acknowledges that men and women are indeed different, despite PC rhetoric to the contrary.
I, personally, like being a woman, don’t want to be a man, and acknowledge that the average man is stronger than I am. I also contend that a dangerous criminal, especially one accused of raping a woman, would probably be delighted that my superiors were stupid enough to leave me alone with him even if I were carrying a rifle.
This is where things can turn deadly in a hurry:
Female officers are more likely to accidentally shoot people. Each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers [Why white women specifically are a factor in the increase of shootings, I find interesting.] in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent. Because of their weaker physical strength, female officers have less time to decide on whether to fire their weapon. If a man makes a mistake and waits too long to shoot a suspect who is attacking him, the male officer still has a chance of using his strength to subdue the attacker. Female officers (as was the case in Atlanta) will lose control of the situation at that point.
Again, common sense is the key here. Sadly, the people running things don’t seem to have any.
Update: John Lott responded to my e-mail. I asked in part, “Why does the number of shootings increase with the number of white female officers specifically?”
His reply: “If you look at page 21 in the pdf file that you can link to from the op-ed, you will see that black males have the lowest rate of accidental shootings, followed by white males, then black females. White females have the highest rate. These four rankings follow closely the relative physical strength of the officers in the four groups.”
To read the study, click on one of the PDF links on this page.
I know I shouldn’t accuse every journalist of blog envy just because they don’t like blogs. But it’s more fun than whining, “Maybe they just don’t understand us.” Let’s see if that’s the case.
Ken Fuson, a columnist at the Des Moines Register writes, “Perhaps you have not heard of blogs. The name derives from a combination of “blather” and “logorrhea.”
Hmm…sounds like envy to me.
Apparently upset that the pajamahadeen are stealing his press, so to speak, Fuson doesn’t (or can’t) disguise his contempt for us blatherers:
This [blogging] has proved to be a boon to people who apparently are (A) unemployed, (B) independently wealthy, or (C ) no longer content to wait on hold to get their daily fix of attention from a radio talk-show host.Let’s put it another way: You know those people who like to write letters to the editor? A blog allows them to write letters all day long, on any subject they choose, without worrying about having the profanity removed or having any of their lunatic rants checked for accuracy. (Source)
Well, I’ll tell you this. At least our “lunatic rants” are more honest than the thinly veiled editorializing reporters used to get away with. And Fuson knows that not all bloggers rant. Some are actually good writers who do real reporting. But if he wrote about blogs fairly, he wouldn’t get to unleash his own rant. In spite of himself, however, Fuson has a point here:
But the great thing is, if you’re a blogger, you get your rants linked to by other bloggers who agree with you, or other bloggers who disagree with you. Before you know it…you will achieve your dream goal: Being invited to appear on a Mainstream Media news show to explain why the Mainstream Media no longer matter.
Guilty!
Blogs have been getting a lot of press lately. CNN has a new segment called “Blog Report.” Blogs have been featured on “Reliable Sources” and “Inside Politics.” MSNBC covers blogs almost everyday. Media critic Howard Kurtz frequently includes blog links in his column. Journalists are writing about bloggers, columnists are covering bloggers, radio talk show hosts are talking about bloggers, and the Federal Election Commission is trying to regulate bloggers. Mainstream media (MSM) and others seem to get it. Their monopoly on information is D-E-A-D.
I understand Fuson’s frustration, but he has only his fellow journalists to blame. If they weren’t such biased leftists pretending to be “moderate” or “centrist,” perhaps bloggers would not have been able to invade their territory. Blame it on Big Media Man, Dan Rather. For that matter, blame it on the rain. Who cares? All I know is MSM’s reign of error is over.
If Fuson would condescend to accept unsolicited advice from a blogger, I’d tell him how he could cure his blog envy in no time.
He should start blogging.
Update: Speaking of MSM (Guilty!), I’ll be on Connected Coast to Coast on Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. to talk about Michael Jackson and his radio interview with Jesse Jackson yesterday. That means I have to actually listen to the two of them talking, which I’m doing now. No comment.
Also, check out Jeff Harrell’s post about another blog-envious journalist.
Update II: Upcoming events - 1) I will speak at the Spring Conference for African-American Journalists of Faith in Atlanta, Georgia, on April 29-30. I will discuss how blogging has impacted journalism and the role of Christian bloggers in general.
2) I’ve been invited to speak at BlogNashville, a three-day blogging conference in Nashville, Tennessee, May 5-7 (My birthday weekend!). I will lead the faith-based blogging session. Other session leaders/speakers: Glenn Reynolds, Henry Copeland of Blogads, Rebecca MacKinnon (of Easongate fame), Robin Burk and others. Registration is limited to 300 people, so sign up now if you’d like to attend.
Update III (3/29): Mr. Fuson, Don’t Fear The Blogger!
Check out John Hawkins’s top 40 favorite blogs.
What a sadly stupid yet freakishly entertaining story this is. Requires registration.
Update: If you’re wondering why your comment disappeared, read this. Disagreement is one thing; sarcasm is quite another. I can’t stand it. Change your tone, and your comment might not be deleted next time.
You may have heard that a gang of thugs called Mara Salvatrucha will be on hand to conduct criminal activity (Do you like that euphemism?) in Arizona next month against law-abiding patriots known as the Minuteman Project, a group of volunteers ready and willing to protect America’s southern border.
Jim Gilchrist, the group’s founder and the epitome of courage, said, “We’re not worried because half of our recruits are retired trained combat soldiers. And those guys are just a bunch of punks.” (Source)
That’s manly man talk. I wish our president would say it, but instead, he utters tripe like this: “I’m against vigilantes in the United States of America. I’m for enforcing law in a rational way. That’s why you got a Border Patrol, and they ought to be in charge of enforcing the border.”
Shameful! I wonder what George Bush has to say to MS-13? “Welcome to our border, boys!” He knows what that band of outlaws is capable of, but he acts as though his countrymen are the outlaws. Read this, Mr. Bush:
Many of the Minuteman volunteers are expected to be armed, although organizers of the border vigil have prohibited them from carrying rifles. Only those people with a license to carry a handgun will be allowed to do so, Mr. Gilchrist said.An operational plan calls for teams of four to eight volunteers to be deployed along the targeted 20-mile stretch of border at intervals of 200 to 300 yards, along with observation posts and a command center.
Mr. Gilchrist said some of the patrols and posts will be right on the U.S.-Mexico border, while others will be located farther north. The volunteers also have been told to “make lots of noise and burn campfires at night to be very visible.”
The Minuteman volunteers are within their rights, unlike the millions of illegal aliens in our country. The president sits idly by while America is burdened to the breaking point. What is wrong with him???
Michelle Malkin is one American who’s dead serious about doing something to raise awareness. In addition to her own blog, she’s started The Immigration Blog. Michelle writes:
Readers ask me “What can I do?” and express frustration with their inability to make a difference in the immigration debate. Quit complaining. Support one of these citizen efforts. Or start your own. Read up on what made the Prop. 200 campaign in Arizona a winner. Then start your own. Read our blog. Or start your own.Your country’s sovereignty and security are in your hands.
Update: How to report illegal aliens.
Bryan Preston: “MS-13 constitutes a clear and present danger to the United States.”
Fausta comments on a New York Times op-ed about the deadly MS-13.
Update II: Read this Newsweek article on MS-13 - The Most Dangerous Gang in America.
Update III (3/29): More news about the gang of witness slayers. These thugs picked up right where DC’s black gangs left off.
