"what's more troubling to me is that a lot of people simply looked the other way."

Yes, indeed.

This is going a little far, even by the standards of bad Rhode Island politics, to secure a campaign volunteer or a block of votes of quizzical number.

Speaking of "looking the other way". RI's lefty blog-of-record is evidently skipping this story and that of the Martineau plea. I feel sorry for that cast of characters over there...gullible, easily-led, hypocrites.

Marc,

I'm confused about what you mean by "a lot of people simply looked the other way". I'm not arguing, but I can't see, from your post at least, who did so.

It sounds as if, when it was learned LaFlamme was not a citizen, she was taken out of the race for Ward 4. In that case, everyone (except LaFlamme herself) seems to have behavied correctly.

I don't believe there's any law that forbid a non-citizen from working on any political campaign. (For instance, I'm going to guess that a lot of non-citizen immigrants from Cuba worked on Republican campaigns in Florida).

There is a dispute about her status. If it is resolved in her favor, she gets to stay. If not, she goes. In the meantime, while the dispute is settled, I assume she has not lost any rights she had.

So who looked the other way, and on what issue?

NOTE: (for those who have trouble with thinking about principles rather than politics). The question is not whether LaFlamme is crook/illegal/fraud or not, but who, if anyone, else is responsible if she is. Given that her boss is a Republican, I hope everyone can appreciate that issue should be thought through carefully.

My hypothesis, George, which is yet unconfirmed, is that that each blog is only allotted a certain amount of electron per day.

RIFuture doesn't mention this story. AnchorRising doesn't mention that Al Gore won the Nobel Prize. It's not bias, just scarcity.

Good thing for you and me that we have the energy to read both blogs.

Not sure your equivalence is equitable, Thomas. If we'd the interest, we'd have no problem mentioning Al Gore. More likely than not, we would mock him, and the Nobel Prize committee, but our not mentioning it could not possibly be construed as either a cover-up or an intellectual paralysis. That call isn't as easy to make, I don't believe, with respect to a local immigration and fraud story and the local left-wing blog.

Somebody should head to city hall and find out if any of those names were registered to vote and/or voted.

Justin,

Well, Gore was just one example. I could have picked other stories from this week, favorable to views this blog opposes, that didn't appear here. You're not really saying, are you, that AR is likely to post such a story (unless you can find a way to make it unfavorable)?

This is not a criticism. AR's bloggers and commenters are almost universally right-leaning, if not totally tipped over, and everyone knows it. My point in my comment to George that it's no more reasonable to expect RIFuture's left-leaning bloggers to post stories about Dem. flaws than to expect that you trumpet their triumphs.

(as an aside, it's still not clear to my to what extent the LaFlamme episode has much, if anything, to do with party politics. See the comment below).

I've been looking for an excuse to mention that I had occasion recently to look trough the archives and found a post by Andrew from a year ago. It was about Cass Sunstein's work on "ideological amplification" among US Circuit court judges. I admire Sunstein's work, so I was pleased to see the post. Sunstein's earlier book on this, Republic.Com (new edition just out) talked about how this happens in blogs: Put a bunch of like-minded people together, without any voice that questions, and the group tends to move to extremes and excesses. Without an "ideological dampner" present, people say more and more outlandish things without check or demand actual evidence for claims (that their opponants are all criminals, for instance).

As people separate themselves into left or right blog readers and amplification happens, political polarization (which I regard as harmful) becomes more extreme.

So, I don't mind if AR continues to be resolutely biased in favor of the right. I learn a lot here. I hope you don't mind me playing the role of "ideological dampner" in the comments section. (I'll note that RIFuture has a few of these...some of of whom are regular commenters here)

Mike says, "Somebody should head to city hall and find out if any of those names were registered to vote and/or voted."

I hope someone will!

My guess is that the people who got the phony licenses are doing their very best to stay off the radar of gov't officials as much as possible, so registering to vote doesn't make much sense for them. Thus, I find the notion that this is some scheme to register large numbers of Democratic Party supporters to be pretty outlandish.

But I am prepared to accept evidence that I'm wrong, so start digging, Mike!

Also, and again, we might also look into the fact that a Republican-controlled administration is responsible for the DMV and its operations and employees.

Oops! It was Marc who posted on Sunstein, not Andrew.
http://www.anchorrising.com/barnacles/003309.html
Sorry.

re: LaFlamme - this is not a Dems vs Reps issue. It is a corrupt vs honest issue. But it doesn't look good for the Dems that she is so involved with them - and that some Dems are actively defending her. Innocent until proven guilty, but that's about as far as the support should go. Anybody want to bet that the State Police got this wrong?

re: Gore - He certainly deserves the Nobel more than previous winner Arafat. But as an engineering prof friend said to me yesterday - "It's a bad day for science".

ChuckR says, "re: LaFlamme - this is not a Dems vs Reps issue. It is a corrupt vs honest issue".

I'm glad to see that not everyone here has completely succumbed to the spirit of party.

Since I already found a way to work in the Sunstein bit, I confess I've also been waiting to find a place to quote James Madison, the father of our Constitution, who, I think, has a lot to say about what is going on here. I think every modern American should reflect on Madison's ideas:

"A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. "

-James Madison, Federalist #10

Thomas,

Spare us this We Are The World nonsense. This illegal was plugged in quite nicely with the Democratic party here in Rhode Island. Won't suprise me a bit to learn she was a mover and shaker with these illegal alien state house rallies. Your willingness to diminish and/or outright ignore her Democratic party connection once again proves my point about the twisted mindset of Democrats. Same for your silly excuse making for the morally vacant RIDemise blog. There is no behavior worthy of condemnation from Democrats if carried out by a Democrat or one of their minions.
Quite sad!

Tim-

1. "This illegal...". Whatever else you want to call LaFlamme, Marc already noted in the post that "It doesn't sound like she was here illegally". She may be deported and, if she committed the acts she's accused of, I hope she is- but that hasn't happened yet. I know you think saying this makes me her supporter, but it doesn't. I just believe in getting the facts straight. I hope you join me in that.

2. The main post and several comments tried to make out that the drivers licence fraud scheme was a voter fraud scheme by and for Democrats. I said (and say) that this seems unlikely, and there's no evidence for it (yet). Do you think that because I'm unwilling to bindly jump on that bandwagon I must be a craven apologist for Democratic criminality?

3. Whatever you think of amnesty (I don't favor it), she has a First Amendment right to participate in any rally she chooses. Unless you think she doesn't?

4. I make no "excuses" for RIFuture. I just find it hypocritical to hold them to a different standard than other political blogs, as George did.

5. "There is no behavior worthy of condemnation from Democrats if carried out by a Democrat or one of their minions." I actually agree with you to some exent, insofar that I believe the Democrats should do more to stand up against the persistent and widespread corruption among the party leaders and their craven catering to special interests. But your statement is absurdly broad and divisive and I can't accept it. Again, we do not yet have any evidence that the Dem Party was in any way behind, or benefited from, the license fraud scheme. If you have such evidence, let's see it. If it's real evidence, I'll accept it. But If you just KNOW this to be true because all Democrats are obviously criminals or abettors, then nevermind.

Tim-

I have to add a comment about your "We are the World' crack. I'm still not sure whether I find that funny, disturbing or just plain odd.

Odd, because you're responding (at least in part) to the quote from James Madison. Thinking about Madison as some sort of sunny, "let's all hug" kind of guy is pretty hard to do. Madison was no idealist. He was a realist who understood human ambition, both its benefits and its destructive potential. That's why he worked to design institutions to control it.

I don't want to ignore real differences, it's the "frivolous and fanciful" ones that bother me, because they distract attention from the real ones.
There are some people who (for political or pychological reasons) thrive on division and who feed it at all opportunities. If finding them useless and/or harmful makes me a "we are the world" kinda guy, then I'm proud to be one.

oh man...Behold, Thomas has been sent to enlighten us. I suggest that everyone just sit back and bask in the aura of his "truthiness".

Why, that's very kind of you, jd.

Marc,

I would still like to know, who is it that you are asserting "looked the other way"? What evidence is there that people withing the Democratic party knew of wrongdoing and did so?

Thanks,
Thomas

Your site is really great! Please visit my one at http://cialis03.info/ (meeble.in