Some prominent conservatives are speaking out in favor of the kind of comprehensive immigration bill that many Republicans oppose — one that would include border security and then a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

As a leading evangelical conservative,

Richard Land’s credentials are impeccable. He heads the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, and from that influential perch he’s been urging his fellow conservatives to rethink their opposition to the immigration overhaul.

“I’ve had some of them appeal to me. They say, ‘Richard, you’re going to divide the conservative coalition.’ And I said, ‘Well, I may divide the old conservative coalition, but I’m not going to divide the new one.’ ”

Land adds, “If the new conservative coalition is going to be a governing coalition, it’s going to have to have a significant number of Hispanics in it, that’s dictated by demographics, and you don’t get large numbers of Hispanics to support you when you’re engaged in anti-Hispanic immigration rhetoric.”

Last week, when President Obama gave his speech on immigration, Land was in the audience. In fact, he had urged the president to make the speech. Obama called on both parties to rise above petty politics to fix the country’s broken immigration system.

Land says that will be very hard because, for both parties, there’s a short-term political advantage to doing nothing.’

For source and more click on:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128352487

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SEARCHING FOR RELIABLE SOURCES,
not hearsay, rumors, or falsehoods.

Tippett describes religion and science as “pursuits of cohesive knowledge and underlying truths” and seeks to dispel the erroneous assumption that these two realms of inquiry are in opposition.

Tippett looks to Einstein’s “self-described ‘cosmic religious sense’” as a key example of how spiritual insights deepen the resonance of scientific discoveries and vice versa. As listeners to her Peabody Award–winning radio program, Speaking of Faith, know,

Tippett is driven by a genuine hunger for understanding of how the revelations of religious traditions, spiritual practices, and cutting-edge findings in science and medicine can help us live more giving and fulfilling lives and create a less polarized society. Tippett sparks a mind-expanding synergy by gathering 13 far-reaching and often-moving discussions with luminaries working in an array of disciplines, including physicist Freeman Dyson, Darwin scholar James Moore, and surgeons and writers Sherwin Nuland and Mehmet Oz.

Impressively well informed, thoughtful, intrepid, and articulate, Tippett steadfastly pilots her ardent conversations toward an elegant clarity, ensuring that complex concepts are comprehensible and relevant to everyone. –Donna Seaman

To hear and see more click on:

http://www.booktv.org/Watch/11450/Einsteins…

For Krista’s bio click on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krista_tippett

OVERDRINKING? http://www.12step.org/

Clinton compares the poisonous political climate that sent Timothy McVeigh to the Murrah building and the debates raging today. He warned political protesters that overheated language could lead to violence again–an admonition that is already being spun as an attempt to curtail dissent voiced by opponents of the Obama Administration.

(NB: NewsBusters is reacting not to the speech itself, but to an interview Clinton gave to the New York Times in which he covered much of the same ground.)

In fact, Clinton isn’t trying to smear or silence anybody. He notes in the speech that Tea Party groups can play a positive role as watchdogs monitoring runaway spending. His speech tries to contextualize their anger and encourages political debate. For my money, this is the key takeaway: “We can’t let the debate veer so far into hatred that we lose focus of our common humanity.” It’s a nice sentiment–and I suspect it will immediately be lost in a flurry of sniping.

For more click on:

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/04/16/clintons-critique-of-overheated-rhetoric/

SUMMARY: Neil Cavuto admitted that Fox News has pushed the false claim that under the health care reform legislation individuals can be sent to jail for not having health insurance, saying: “I’ve researched this and a number of Fox personalities had made that comment.” Cavuto’s acknowledgment contradicts Bill O’Reilly’s false claim that “[n]obody” on Fox advanced the assertion.

Cavuto: “I’ve researched this, and a number of Fox personalities had made that comment.” On the April 14 edition of Your World, Cavuto responded to Sen. Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) prior statement during a town hall meeting that contrary to a constituent’s claim, the idea that individuals could be put in jail for not having health insurance under the recently-passed health care legislation “makes for good TV news on Fox but that isn’t the intention.” Cavuto admitted to Coburn regarding the jail-time falsehood: “You’re quite right, I’ve researched this and a number of Fox personalities had made that comment.”

Indeed, Fox has relentlessly pushed the jail-time falsehood. As Cavuto noted, several Fox News personalities made the claim. These personalities include GlennBeck, Dick Morris, Sean Hannity, Andrew Napolitano, and Greta Van Susteren, as well as Fox News’ website Fox Nation and a Fox & Friends on-screen caption.

For the full story and video click on: http://mediamatters.org/… and mediamatters.org/research/201004130073

Paul Starr:
According to last week’s Washington Post, the public option is the “crux” of the health-reform debate and the “greatest challenge” for Senate negotiators to overcome. That’s an accurate description of the current political scene, but it’s true only because so many people, including members of Congress, are responding ideologically to the ideaof government involvement.

The public option is not the biggest question in reform. Under the proposals being considered, it would be offered only within insurance exchanges at the state and regional level. The far bigger question is how those exchanges work:

For the rest of the debate click on:

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=debating_the_public_option