Illegal Immigrant Became a Cop in Alaska

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – For years, the man known as Rafael Espinoza was widely respected as an exemplary police officer who was popular among his peers in Alaska's largest city.

All that ended this week when authorities discovered he was really Mexican national Rafael Mora-Lopez, who was in the U.S. illegally and stole another man's identity, officials charged.

"His reputation here is one of a hard-working officer, one who was very professional," Anchorage Police Chief Mark Mew said Friday at a news conference announcing Mora-Lopez's arrest. "The problem, obviously, is he is not Rafael Espinoza."

Soon after the announcement, Mora-Lopez appeared in U.S. District Court in Anchorage and pleaded not guilty to a charge of passport fraud, which carries a maximum 10-year sentence. At his arraignment, Mora-Lopez told a federal magistrate he is 47, even though officials listed his age as 51.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/23/officials-illegal-immigrant-cop-alaska/#ixzz1KLcTM0Bd

Papa John's, Huggies Pull Ads from Wonkette After Despicable Trig Palin Post

Know what doesn't go over well with advertisers? Making fun of disabled children.

On April 18, political blog Wonkette published a post titled "Greatest Living American: A Children's Treasury of Trig Crap On His Birthday" (none of which we will quote here). Trig, for those who don't remember, is Sarah Palin's youngest son, who has Down Syndrome. The initial response to this "celebration" of Trig's birthday was limited to comments getting in on the action, contributing the sort of jokes that would make Gilbert Gottfried proud.

But then, according to Slate's David Weigel, conservative bloggers stumbled across it and the outcry started. It quickly spread across political lines as people of all stripes (or claiming to be) declared the post beyond tasteless and started demanding that advertisers pull ads.

So far, the Twitter presences for both Papa John's and Huggies have decried the post. According to the Papa John's tweet, the company will make sure its ads won't run on Wonkette in the future. Huggies went so far as to tweet, "All -- We do not support the @Wonkette story & have taken action 2 pull r ads, effective immediately. TY 4 bringing this issue to r att'n!"

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/trig-palin/2011/04/20/papa-johns-huggies-pull-ads-wonkette-after-despicable-trig-palin-post?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation_20110422#ixzz1KHV60Rsl

Liberal Heckler Screams Profanity at 14-Year-Old Girl

http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/18/liberal-heckler-screams-profanity-14-year-old-girl?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation_20110419

Media continues inventing new terms for 'tax increase'

ABC's Christiane Amanpour practically begged for higher taxes on “This Week” during a panel segment, but she of course did not use the term 'higher taxes' in her argument. Instead, she argued government should come up with 'revenue raising mechanisms' to fix the deficit. Thankfully, Congressman Joe Walsh was on the panel and called Amanpour and the rest of the media out for the ridiculousness and blatant hypocrisy on their overtly friendly coverage of Obama during the budget battle. news@glennbeck.com

Spending Cuts

When Republicans and Democrats announced last week they'd come to a last-minute budget deal to avert a government shutdown, they said they'd agreed to $38 billion in spending cuts. The exact figure was important, because Republicans had promised their tea party supporters they'd go further--$100 billion was the original pledge, reduced to $61 billion in the House budget passed in February. So they were at pains to present $38 billion as a good first step.

But an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that the deal, which passed Congress yesterday, will cut spending for the year by just $352 million—less than 1 percent of the much-touted $38 billion figure. In fact, when money for emergency military action is factored in, spending may actually go up this year. How can that be? The CBO said that $13-$18 billion of the "cuts" represented money that only existed on paper, in the form of IOUs to government agencies, and wasn't likely to be spent in the near future, or perhaps ever. Other cuts went for projects that wouldn't have paid out for several years—so the money would eventually have been spent, just not this year.

This is a tricky one. On the one hand, many of these cuts will take effect eventually, just not this year. On the other, even when all is said and done, it seems certain that  the $38 billion figure won't pan out. So we'll put the claim this one right in the center of our gauge: midway between airtight, and totally bogus.http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110415/ts_yblog_thelookout/closer-look-lead-codices-spending-cuts-and-the-deficit-problem