What differentiates Jason Atkinson and Lars Larson?

You can trust the word of Atkinson. I'm not sure you can say the same about Larson.

Strong words? You bet. Let me explain why I say them.

As Atkinson was explaining his position on immigration on today's show, he said he supported the president's immigration policy because the president specifically said he wanted a guest worker program that "rejects amnesty."

Was Atkinson wrong? Yes. The document sent to KXL after Atkinson's interrogation proves it (this is a close paraphrase):

The President is calling on Congress to develop legislation to offer temporary worker status to undocumented workers currently in the United States.

Will Atkinson think twice before again taking the president's word on immigration? Probably, and with good cause. But Atkinson took George W. Bush at his word, which I find admirable. It shows he puts a premium on his word and the word of others.

Furthermore, he said (by Larson's own admission) about 15 times: "I do not support amnesty." He said almost that many times that if the president's plan does include amnesty, he would not support that.

Did Larson take Atkinson at his word? No. He called him dishonest. He said Jason wasn't answering the questions, even suggesting that he was engaged in Clintonian word games. Apparently, someone's word isn't sufficient for Larson -- he must still follow the age-old journalistic credo: if your mother says she loves you, check it out.

Larson would like to think he wasn't rude -- and some callers were all too happy to blow smoke up his butt to that effect -- but these quotes from today's show indicate he knew exactly what he was doing:

• "I don't care if people think I'm rude, because I want answers."
• "I don't want to be rude to people."
• "Jason wasn't answering the question. He wasn't being honest with himself."

Well, actually, Atkinson answered the question time and time again. Larson chose not to listen because he was looking for a fight. He refused to take Atkinson at his word. Atkinson has reason not to take GWB at his word, having done so and gotten burned by it; Larson has no previous history (that I know of) that should cause him to distrust Atkinson's word.

And frankly, Larson is holding Atkinson to a different standard than Mannix and Saxton. If Larson is right that a national program that provides legality for immigrants would preclude the governor from withholding state benefits, that would apply to any governor, not just Atkinson. Essentially, Larson is imposing his dislike of the president's program upon Atkinson.

At least he was willing to let Atkinson's campaign manager get a word in edgewise, but he couldn't resist distorting Atkinson's position again. When Matt Evans explained, in response to the above-mentioned White House document, that Atkinson wouldn't support that program (which was the exact same thing that Atkinson had said less than an hour earlier), Larson's response was: "Your candidate doesn't think that." Never mind that the entire discussion with Atkinson came before the White House document arrived. Never mind that Atkinson specifically said on numerous occasions that he wouldn't support the president's plan if it included amnesty.

I'll trust the word of Jason Atkinson long before I believe Lars Larson.