Open thread: Headlines 6/2

posted at 10:52 am on June 2, 2007 by Allahpundit

For all your one-stop commenting needs…

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Newest cause of global warming: Carbon credits

What else can you say, but ha-ha!

lorien1973 on June 2, 2007 at 11:01 AM

Bush pressing hard on immigration bill
WASHINGTON – President Bush challenged lawmakers on Friday to pass an immigration bill that would legalize millions of unlawful immigrants despite the harsh criticism they’re hearing from voters and interest groups on both sides of the issue.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070602/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration;_ylt=AlBW7bsIN_e9oyP_pw.zXRCtOrgF

Yea they hear us.

Speakup on June 2, 2007 at 11:14 AM

Didn’t the American revolution have something to do with the Government not paying attention to the citizens?

gmoonster on June 2, 2007 at 11:24 AM

I love the story of a U.S. Navy ship firing its deck gun at terror targets in Somalia … I just wish it had been the U.S.S. Cole.

Go Navy!

Tony737 on June 2, 2007 at 11:25 AM

I just wish it had been the U.S.S. Cole.

… or the USS Missouri

Zorro on June 2, 2007 at 1:49 PM

Allah forgets to provide Taliban with life preservers.

Bwahahaha!

infidel4life on June 2, 2007 at 3:35 PM

In the Pick and Click headlines at the top of the page, in the one re NRO and the WSJ debate, the Junkyard Blog adds a line that’s not in the NYT article:

Reflecting the division between the business wing and the rest of the party, the editorial board of The National Review, which opposes the legislation, has issued a debate challenge to The Journal’s business-minded editorial board, which is more supportive. (The Journal editorial page editor, Paul Gigot, dismissed the challenge, saying National Review writers had not accepted offers to appear on The Journal’s program on Fox to discuss the matter.)

The italicized words aren’t there. I’d already read that column this morning before I saw the JYB and didn’t remember the line. I just reread the article.

I thought when you added something to someone else’s words you were supposed to enclose it [like this].

Was this said on TV? Is it in a transcript somewhere on the web?

Thanks

INC on June 2, 2007 at 3:37 PM

Sky – Vote for Sex

uhhhh, Yes.

AP and the crew, Good luck and Thanks for the ‘evolving’ Hot Air!

normsrevenge on June 2, 2007 at 5:41 PM

The italicized words aren’t there. I’d already read that column this morning before I saw the JYB and didn’t remember the line. I just reread the article.

Those italicized words were in the Times article. JYB didn’t add them.

Allahpundit on June 2, 2007 at 5:43 PM

Carmudgeony Novak is positive on Fred, here and now. He’ll write it as he sees it, many times later.

In his Senate voting record and his public utterances, Thompson is more conservative than Giuliani, McCain or Romney. He takes a hard line on the war against terror (referring in Connecticut to the danger of “suicidal maniacs” crossing open borders) and worries about immigration policy creating a permanent American underclass.

For the blogging world this is good

Beyond ideology, Thompson envisions a 21st-century campaign, utilizing the Internet more and spending less money than his opponents.

Entelechy on June 2, 2007 at 6:32 PM

Thanks for fixing the formatting of the “We pick you click” headlines – um, except that one. Or was it just a coincidence that all the others were the same length?
DKK

LifeTrek on June 2, 2007 at 6:41 PM

Such sentiments have reverberated through talk radio, conservative publications like National Review and Fox News.

Did anyone else see this from the New York Times? Talking about immigration reform. Ha! Conservative Publications. Fine. Then everytime you preface an article, Slimes, I want to see somewhere you say you are a liberal publication.

wryteacher on June 2, 2007 at 6:55 PM

AP,

Not to be contradictory, but to clarify, here’s the NYT link from JYB, and here’s a direct cut and paste from that link with that paragraph and the one following it:

Reflecting the division between the business wing, Congressional moderates and the rest of the party, the editorial board of National Review, which opposes the legislation, has issued a debate challenge to The Journal’s business-minded editorial board, which is more supportive.

Opposition to Mr. Bush’s immigration plan, which calls for a way to legalize illegal workers who are here now, has been stiff for years. But last year, when similar legislation was under debate, opponents were rightly confident that Republican leaders who controlled Congress would not let it progress. Mr. Bush, not wishing to intensify the fight in an election year, stayed behind the scenes and relented when the legislation died.

Did the NYT take the phrase out? Is it elsewhere in the article (I can’t find it)? Or is it from something JYB read or heard elsewhere?

INC on June 2, 2007 at 7:05 PM

The NYT paragraph has the added words “Congressional moderates.”

Here is the JYB paragraph:

Reflecting the division between the business wing and the rest of the party, the editorial board of The National Review, which opposes the legislation, has issued a debate challenge to The Journal’s business-minded editorial board, which is more supportive. (The Journal editorial page editor, Paul Gigot, dismissed the challenge, saying National Review writers had not accepted offers to appear on The Journal’s program on Fox to discuss the matter.)

INC on June 2, 2007 at 7:08 PM

The Italian aphrodisiac article just goes to show that some cultural customs are best left in their native land. This gives a whole new meaning to ‘Hey baby ya wanna play hide the salami?’

sonnyspats1 on June 2, 2007 at 7:37 PM

Fremont Oak Gardens-
A retirement community built for the elderly DEAF folks, but because of discrimination complaints, it is now filled by more than 60% of hearing occupants.
Gov’t money helped build these apartments and are specialized with lights and loud tones for fire alarms, etc for the hearing impaired.

Is it because of braille on everything under the sun, the handicapped parking for thousands more spots than possible to fill, on and on…that with all the whining the ‘activists’ did for these handicapped groups is now coming to bite ‘em in the arse?
You knew it would happen, but it’s a shame it happened to this group. ( altho it is on SF bay area…go figure)

shooter on June 2, 2007 at 8:12 PM

Putin to target the Euros? First, South Park predicts the Ginger thing, and now the Simpsons get one. Must Crush Capitalism

Krydor on June 2, 2007 at 10:20 PM

I have answered my own question:

Googling this: Bush’s Push on Immigration Tests Base Paul Gigot

will give you this:

Bush’s Push on Immigration Tests His Base – New York Times
Bush’s Push on Immigration Tests His Base … (The Journal editorial page editor, Paul Gigot, dismissed the challenge, saying National Review writers had …
http://www.nytimes.com/…/washington/03immig.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1180804757-suK1RlsWt5Cxr41JECVEZg – Jun 2, 2007 – Similar pages – Note this – Filter

So at some point the NYT changed the wording in the article.

My next question is why?

INC on June 2, 2007 at 10:43 PM

Putin to Europe: I will nuke you

And leftists Communists worldwide applaud.

steveegg on June 2, 2007 at 11:08 PM

On the Nimoy story of his new photography hobby: I thought the headline on here was rather unfair (give us big girls some love here!), but I thought the story was great. I think if there wwere more photographers out there willing to show beauty in all sizes, eating disorders wouldn’t be so prevalent.

ScoopPC11 on June 3, 2007 at 10:25 AM