It’s a real disappointment that Gov. Schwarzenegger felt so compelled (read: politically pressured) to apologize for his candid remarks about the issue of illegal immigration earlier this week.

He said nothing wrong.

As reported earlier, speaking to reporters on the topic, Arnold called for “closing the border” between Mexico and America. Which, by contrast, suggests that our borders are currently “open.” Indeed, open to illegal immigrants from south of the border, which have been breaking the law and entering our country by the millions.

That is fact. No point in arguing.

But instead Schwarzenegger publicly apologized by stating: “It was a language problem.”

To the contrary, illegal immigration is a problem that requires strong language to advance some real policy changes. For over 20 years, through various polls, Americans have steadily advocated reductions and restrictions in both illegal AND legal immigration. Politicans have ignored the data. (For a good book on the subject, see Alien Nation by Peter Brimelow)

More recently, many assimilated hispanics have also called for some restraints. The notion that all immigrants want more immigrants is inherently a myth, perpetuated by special interest groups with their own agendas.

Gov. Schwarzenegger should not stop speaking about this subject. Perhaps he should used more words to explain the serious problem, not less.

No matter what Arnold does, there will always be critics. If not, then he’s probably not doing his job. His Democratic opponents will never understand him, because conservatives don’t speak the same political language. The misunderstandings are intentional. That’s politics.

The Sac Bee reports:

California treasurer and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides jumped on Schwarzenegger’s misstatement Wednesday, saying in a prepared statement that the comment was “deeply regrettable” and represented “an affront to Mexico.”

Angelides’ press office put out the treasurer’s statement before Schwarzenegger apologized. But a spokesman for Angelides said afterward that the criticism still stood.

“The governor’s words were an embarrassment unworthy of the leader of a nation-state of 36 million people,” said Dan Newman, Angelides’ spokesman.

Maybe listening and understanding are the greater problems. Or, simply, talking bullshit. Democrats will never apologize for that.

RELATED: Chris Kelley has more.

Republicans need to wise up.

While we’re all in favor of managed hunting as sport and the legal right to bear arms, this story is a bit sick and twisted.

Reuters reports: “California state senators approved a bill on Thursday that would ban hunters from killing animals over the Internet.”

Yes, at first glance, you might think it’s a joke. But no.

“Hunters can currently stalk prey online at Live-shot.com, a Web site linking firearms and cameras so customers can point, click and shoot antelope, sheep and wild hogs on a Texas ranch from thousands of miles away.”

While we understand the company is positioning its service as a resource for “handicapped” hunters, it’s merit remains arguable.

“It’s an over-the-top, pay-per-view video game using live animals for target practice that ought to be banned from coast-to-coast,” said Sen. Debra Bowen, the bill’s author.

“Pay-per-view hunting doesn’t meet any definition of ’sporting’ that I’ve ever heard because there’s nothing ’sporting’ about sitting at your computer in your pajamas, using your mouse to shoot at hogs or antelope or any other animal that’s halfway across the country,” Bowen said.

Let us never be accused of being entirely partisan: Sen. Bowen, a Democrat, makes sense on this one. If you’re not hunting live, why kill real animals? Play a video game.

Hunting for sport is a very personal thing. Doing it over the Internet is, well, just like anything else online: not the real thing. Accept no imitations.

How’s that for a teaser title?

Cupertino, CA-based Apple Computer faced some controversy at it’s annual meeting yesterday, including protests over environmental issues and a demand for more women in senior roles.

CNET reports: “CEO Steve Jobs defended the company’s record on recycling and other environmental concerns, which were the subject of a picket that attracted about a dozen protesters outside the shareholder meeting, held at the company’s headquarters.”

“As to the lack of women in senior positions, Jobs said there are many women in different roles at the company, but said he understands the company has a dearth of female executives.”

“It is a deficiency we have,” he said. “We recognize it and we are trying to solve it.”

In the meantime, the stock has more than doubled in the past year.

RELATED: To be fair, Apple is not the only tech company caught in the crosshairs of political activism. Software giant, Microsoft, is coming under fire from gay rights groups. NY Times has the story.

AP reports: “A U.S. State Department official said Thursday that an interim report on corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program did not exonerate Kofi Annan as the secretary-general had claimed.

In fact, the Independent Inquiry Committee’s interim report faulted Annan’s management of the oil-for-food program, which was set up to help ordinary Iraqis cope with crippling U.N. sanctions imposed on Saddam Hussein’s regime after his 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

RELATED: The United Nations: What’s The Point?

CNS News reports: “The French government is pressing on with its campaign to end the European Union arms embargo on China, despite opposition from the U.S., Japan, European lawmakers, and human rights campaigners.

The E.U. recently began to back away from a plan to lift the 16-year-old ban by the middle of this year, prompted in part by unhappiness over a new Chinese law permitting the use of force to prevent Taiwan’s breakaway.”

But French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, who began a visit to Beijing on Thursday, made it clear that Paris would continue to press for the “unfair” embargo to end.

With Saddam out of business, it appears the French government needs to find new clients.

Campus protest for dollars?

Michelle Malkin points out news of Michael Moore’s latest contribution to society: a gimmicky scholarship for college students to act up and out.

The Michael Moore Freedom of Speech Scholarship will award two $2,500 annual scholarships to Cal State San Marcos students “who have done the most to fight for issues of student rights by standing up to the administration,” according to a news release issued Wednesday.

You’d think the most important student “right” is to get a good education, but it’s unlikely Mr. Moore is considering that a criteria. If people get too smart, they might wise up to what a fraud he is. So, better to place value on disruptiveness. (Sorry, that’s “political activism” in collegiate parlance)

Sidenote: Considering Moore’s personal wealth, $5,000 a year seems pretty stingy. Wonder if he’ll write it off?

We’ve got our own “freedom of speech” initiative here: it’s called Hollywood Doesn’t Speak For Everyone. And you’re invited.

Maybe Michael Moore will make a donation. It’s for a good cause. Speaking out, indeed.

The ultra-liberal Village Voice writes: “Far from backing down, Tom DeLay and his red-state allies are pushing their fight deep into the soft underbelly of the timid blue-state homeland, drawing shrieks of rage and pain as they go.”

Soft and timid? Must be scary. Rage and pain? Wow. Somebody call an ambulance.

“Republicans are drunk with power,” New York (blue state) congressman Charles B. Rangel said yesterday on CBS. “It’s abuse of power in the House rules,” said Maryland (blue state) Democrat Steny Hoyer. “It’s abuse of power in the ethics process. It’s abuse of power in threatening judges. It’s an abuse of power of threatening.”

Charlie Rangel, always noteworthy. Not afraid to really analyze the issues. Like alleging that Bush was going to reinstate the draft. And Steny Hoyer, out of the gates. People, it ain’t easy to use “abuse of power” four times in one sound bite.

Sure does sound like Democrats are frightened.

Reuters reports: “Canada should grant special protection to U.S. soldiers who desert from the war in Iraq, even if they do not qualify as refugees, U.S. activists said on Thursday.

A Canadian refugee tribunal rejected the asylum claim of U.S. infantryman Jeremy Hinzman last month, dealing a blow to several other soldiers who have fled north of the border.

The activists met with Canadian parliamentarians in Ottawa to ask that the soldiers be given legal status.

Tom Hayden, a former 1960s antiwar leader, said that if the deserters are not allowed to stay legally they could potentially be extradited back to the United States.

Well, Mr. Hayden would be an authority on this matter. After all, he was once married to “Hanoi” Jane Fonda. Misery loves company.

AP reports: “The man at the wheel of a roaring dune buggy rips a swirling trail over the desolate landscape on a morning ride. He veers to the south, and then whips back.

That prompts U.S. Border Patrol agent Danielle Suarez to pull him over and give him a warning. The dune rider doesn’t know it, but he just crossed into Mexico and back.”

Here, along a five-mile stretch of constantly shifting sands, the border is invisible. It’s an opportunity for drug smugglers to slip over the line and mix with the off-roading crowd — and a challenge for the agents trying to spot them.

The Imperial Sand Dunes, a desolate desert expanse, is a giant playground for all-terrain vehicle enthusiasts. On busy weekends between fall and spring, when the temperatures are tolerable, ATV riders, dune buggy fans and campers in motor homes swarm over the sands. A holiday weekend can draw close to 200,000 people.

“It’s so easy for them (smugglers) to blend in, looking for a way to get onto I-8,” Suarez says as she meanders the hills in a pickup truck. “There’s really nothing separating the two countries.”

Maybe this unstable situation is something the ACLU can look into — when they’re done going after Sean Hannity, of course.

Unbelieavable.

NOTE: Check out the Arizona Conservative for a collection of stories following the Minutemen

Scott Ott reports:

Governors of Arizona, Nevada and Oregon today praised California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s call to “close the borders,” saying it would improve the security and living conditions of all citizens in their own states.

However, a spokesman for Gov. Schwarzenegger said he was speaking of the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada, not California’s borders with neighboring states.

“We’re grateful for Arnold’s unilateral move to protect us from incursion by Californians,” the three governors said in a joint news release. “Our porous borders have posed a grave threat to our states for too many years. The ideological degradation spawned by this influx has devastated our own local cultures.”

A spokesman for the local branch of the Minuteman Project said its patrols would continue to man border checkpoints looking for California license plates and “backpackers in Birkenstocks.