Image
Demagoguery
"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."

Franklin D. Roosevelt


Regular Reads
Eschaton
Tapped
Daily Kos
The Liquid List
Matthew Yglesias
Talking Points Memo
Slacktivist
James Wolcott
Michael Berube
Political Animal
How Appealing
MaxSpeak, You Listen!
Tbogg
TalkLeft
Rittenhouse Review
Neal Pollack
Suckful
Cursor
John Moltz
Southern Appeal
Nathan Newman
The Poor Man
NRO's "The Corner"
Pandagon
Wonkette
Legal Fiction
Sugar, Mr. Poon?
Carpetbagger Report
Balkinization
Happy Furry Puppy Story Time w/ Norbizness
This Is Not Over


Contact Us
Eugene Oregon
Noam Alaska
Helena Montana
Frederick Maryland
Zoe Kentucky
Arnold P. California


Mutual Admiration Society
DCCC's The Stakeholder
Abolish the Death Penalty
Busy Busy Busy
Uggabugga
New American Empire
Staunch Moderate
A La Gauche
The Moderate Voice
The Sneaky Rabbit
Bluegrassroots
Political Strategy
Cutting to the Chase
Acrentropy
The Blue Bus
American Monkey
Restless Mania
Your Right Hand Thief
Naked Furniture
Dimmy Karras
The Department of Louise
Torvus Futurus
HellaFaded
Live From the Nuke Free Zone
Proof Through the Night
No More Apples
Slapnose
PoliGeek
Irrational Bush Hatred
The Slugging Southpaw
I Voted for George
Nosey Online
Donna's Place
Schadenfreude
Resource.full
wordsimageslife
The Bully Pulpit
Lying Socialist Weasels
TJ Griffin
To The Barricades
Omni-Curious
Eat Your Vegetables
Stoutdem
Suddenly Routine
The Story So Far
Skimble
Marstonalia
The Lefty Directory
ZipSix
ReachM High Cowboy Network
John Hoke's Personal Asylum
Riba Rambles
The Bone
Fables of the Reconstruction
The Modulator
Planet Swank
Scoobie Davis Online
Single-Minded
World Phamous
The Good Life
Something's Got To Break
Upside-down Hippopotamus
Damfacrats 2004
The Fulcrum
BeatBushBlog
archy
Yankee From Mississippi
It's A Crock!
Red Wheelbarrow
Apropos of Nothing
Political Parrhesia
The Mahablog
Mousemusings
Restlessgeist
Galois
Muise in Gradland
American Leftist
Political Blog Directory
Boiled Meat
John Costello
Skydiver Salad
The Game & How We Played It
Soupie's BBQ and Daycare
Odd Hours
Nebraska Liberal
The American Street
Approximately Perfect


If you have linked to us and don't see your name, please send us an e-mail and we'll add you.


Recommendations
















Archives:


-- HOME --



This page is powered by Blogger. Why isn't yours?
Friday, January 09, 2004


Tweedleperle and Tweedlefrum

Perle and Frum, while hocking their new book

Two of President George W. Bush's military advisors said that the US inability to find illegal weapons in Iraq means little.

"I don't think that you can draw any conclusion from the fact that the stockpiles were not found," Pentagon advisor Richard Perle said at the American Enterprise Institute.

Perle said he did not fear that the United States would lose credibility after Bush used Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction as his principal justification for going to war.

"If others are going to take the view that, because these weapons weren't found, nothing that the United States says can be trusted -- there's not much we can do about that," he said. "It would be a foolish conclusion to draw."

[edit]

[Regarding France's opposition to the war]

"Sometimes the right answer, when a person has a grievance against you, is to say: 'You're completely mistaken; that grievance comes out of a completely wrong way of looking at the world and you're just going to have to get over it'," Frum said.

"We're not going to change."

Actually, the most foolish conclusion one could draw is that you two are not idiots. And if that upsets you, well, it is only because you are completely mistaken and have a completely wrong way of looking at the world. You're just going to have to get over it.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 8:42 PM




Something in the Water?

Earlier today, Noam pointed out John Derbyshire's most recent lunacy. There must have been some kind of cosmic meltdown over the holidays because this piece from the Claremont Review of Books is one of the most laughable things I've read in a long time. You kind of get a clue from the title: "Wimps and Barbarians: The Sons of Murphy Brown." But really, it only gets better as you read his thesis.
except for a few lucky members of their sex, most women today must choose between males who are whiny, incapable of making decisions, and in general of "acting like men," or those who treat women roughly and are unreliable, unmannerly, and usually stupid.

The young men, for their part, are not a little embarrassed when they hear these charges but can't wholly deny them. Indeed, when asked the simple question, "When have you ever been taught what it means to be a man?" they are typically speechless and somewhat ashamed.
Or maybe they're just mesmerized by the hostile and presumptuous question? Well, let's move on to see what the deal is with the barbarian half of the Murphy Brown legacy.
Today's barbarians are not hard to find. Like the barbarians of old, the new ones wander about in great packs. You can recognize them by their dress, their speech, their amusements, their manners, and their treatment of women. You will know them right away by their distinctive headgear. They wear baseball caps everywhere they go and in every situation....

Recognizing other barbarians by their ball caps, one barbarian can enter into a verbal exchange with another anywhere: in a men's room, at an airport, in a movie theater. This exchange, which never quite reaches the level of conversation, might begin with, "Hey, what up?" A traditional response: "Dude!" The enlightening colloquy can go on for hours at increasingly high volumes. "You know, you know!" "What I'm sayin'!" "No way, man!" "What the f---!" "You da man!" "Cool!" "Phat!" "Awesome!" And so on. Barbarians do not use words to express thoughts, convey information, paint pictures in the imagination, or come to a rational understanding. Such speech as they employ serves mainly to elicit in others audible reactions to a few sensual events: football, sex, hard rock, the latest barbarian movie, sex, football.
And that doesn't even include the section about young people and their fornication music. Think I'm kidding?
Barbarians, not surprisingly, listen to barbaric music. Allan Bloom famously identified rock-and-roll as the music of sexual intercourse. It was no accident that the progenitor of the rock-and-roll revolution was nicknamed "the Pelvis." Equally basic, but fundamentally different, are the passions enlisted by modern rock without the roll, that is, heavy metal. It is certainly not the music of intercourse, at least not of the consensual variety, since girls and women generally hate it. And with good reason: It is impossible to dance to.
I'll leave the anthropological discussion of the wimps, plus the requisite blaming of the sexual revolution for the more intrepid reader to discover. The writer is a principal of a charter school in Fort Collins, Colorado and I shudder to think what a day in his mind would be like.

posted by Helena Montana at 5:58 PM




Does the Constitution Mean What it Says?

The Federalist Society has released a report on the constitutionality of recess appointing federal judges. Amid citing a myriad of historical evidence that nearly every president has made such appointments, they assert that such appointments are constitutional but, in doing so, make a pretty weak argument on a pretty key point that, I think, undermines their entire report.

Article II, Section 2 says

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

The key word here is "happen." A straightforward, textualist reading of this would lead one to conclude that only those vacancies that "happen," or occur, during a Senate recess can be filled by recess appointments. Unfortunately, that has not been the historical understanding.

Nonetheless, the Constitution means what it says and any other interpretation of this section can result only from an intentional misreading of the language, leading to arguments like this

The text of the Constitution provides that the President may use his Recess Appointments power to fill any vacancy “that may happen” during a recess of the Senate. One possible construction of the word “happen” is that only those vacancies that “happen to occur” during a recess of the Senate can be filled by recess appointment. Such a limited construction of the phrase, however, was rejected early in the country’s history. A long line of Attorney General and Office of Legal Counsel opinions have held that the word refers to those vacancies that “happen to exist” during a recess of the Senate, whether the vacancies arise before or during the recess.

Just because various Attorneys General and Offices of Legal Counsel have concluded that "happen" means "happen to exist" because doing so allowed them to engage in otherwise prohibited activity does not mean that it is so.

How a group of people supposedly committed to defending the Constitution as it was originally written can buy that argument is beyond me.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 4:48 PM




Hooray for the GDP!

Unfortunately, people can't eat the gross domestic product statistics, nor can they be used to pay the rent, health care, or child care.

Remember all that crowing about the huge jump in GDP in the third quarter? Well, it fell back to something much more normal for a post-recession recovery in the fourth quarter, but it was still healthy at nearly 4%. And I'd love for the economy to be improving as much as the GDP number alone would suggest it is--I don't want people to be miserable and hungry just to make Bush's reelection prospects worse.

The problem is that GDP isn't the whole story. Check this out from the excellent jobwatch.org.


If you're doing well--you've got a good job, you have money to save and invest--then the GDP bump is good news indeed. But if you need a job, or if your job pays lousy wages that aren't enough to survive on, you're still screwed, at least for the time being.

By the way, only six months after the Jobs [sic] and Growth Act of 2003 (i.e., tax cuts for the rich) took effect, we're already a million and a half jobs short of what Dubya promised.



I don't think compassionate conservative is an oxymoron. But Bush and his team aren't compassionate anythings.

posted by Arnold P. California at 4:41 PM




Terrorist Truckers

From CNN

The FBI and other federal agencies Thursday offered a reward of up to $100,000 for information leading to the arrest of the author or authors of a letter found in a South Carolina post office containing the deadly poison ricin.

The letter included a sealed metal container with a small amount of ricin inside. It was discovered by a processing clerk at a postal facility October 15 in Greenville, South Carolina, but no one was exposed to the poison.

The typewritten letter was addressed to the Department of Transportation and demanded that changes in truckers' sleep/work schedules not be implemented.

"I have easy access to castor pulp," the author of the letter wrote, referring to the waste of castor bean processing which can be used to make ricin.

"If my demand is dismissed I'm capable of making ricin," the letter continued. "My demand is simple, January 4, 2004 starts the new hours of service for trucks which include a ridiculous ten hours in the sleeper berth. Keep it at eight or I will start dumping."

Those federal regulations did go into effect Sunday, allowing long haul drivers to be on the road for 11 hours after 10 hours off-duty.

Sounds like someone needs a little nap.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:51 PM




You Don't Say?

From Reuters

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill likened President Bush at Cabinet meetings to "a blind man in a room full of deaf people," according to excerpts on Friday from a CBS interview.

I don't really understand that reference, but it doesn't seem very complimentary.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 1:16 PM




Can We Expect An Apology Now?

Several months ago, Bill O'Reilly said

Here's, here's the bottom line on this for every American and everybody in the world, nobody knows for sure, all right? We don't know what he has. We think he has 8,500 liters of anthrax. But let's see. But there's a doubt on both sides. And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right? But I'm giving my government the benefit of the doubt. . . .

[edit]

. . . if he has 8,500 liters of anthrax that he's not going to give up, even though the United Nations demanded that he do that, we are doing the right thing. If he doesn't have any weapons, then we are doing the wrong thing. So, we'll see.

On his own show last night, he said

Things might change, but right now it looks like the CIA overestimated the weapons of mass destruction threat in Iraq.

So I expect that we will be hearing his apology mighty soon.

O'Reilly then went on to argue that this was probably just a simple mistake and then used that point as a platform to address his own personal demons

Americans are a forgiving people and we all make mistakes. We are now living in an age of ideological demagoguery where honest mistakes are turned into lies by ruthless, dishonest individuals. It makes me sick.

I wonder who he could be alluding to here? Al Franken perhaps, for exposing O'Reilly's "I won a Peabody" lie?

Or maybe the reference to "demagoguery" is aimed at us for things like this or this or this or this or this. But probably not.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 1:01 PM




Black Lung Is SO Last Century

Nature reports on the wave of the future in carbon inhalation diseases. Could there be a "Black Brain" disease in our future?
Gunter Oberdorster of the University of Rochester in New York and colleagues tracked the progress of carbon particles that were only 35 nanometres in diameter and had been inhaled by rats. In the olfactory bulb - an area of the brain that deals with smell - nanoparticles were detected a day after inhalation, and levels continued to rise until the experiment ended after seven days.

"These are the first data to show this," says Ken Donaldson, a toxicologist at the University of Edinburgh, UK. "I would never have thought of looking for inhaled nanoparticles in the brain."

[edit]

Little is known about what effect nanoparticles will have when they reach the brain. The toxicity of the nanoparticles that are currently being used to build prototype nanosized electronic circuits - such as carbon nanotubes, which are produced in labs around the world - has not been thoroughly assessed.

But Donaldson says that there is a growing feeling that other nanoparticles, such as those produced by diesel exhausts, may be damaging to some parts of our body. He estimates that people in cities take in about 25 million nanoparticles with every breath. These particles are believed to increase respiratory and cardiac problems, probably by triggering an inflammatory reaction in the lungs.

Oberdorster's unpublished work includes evidence that some nanoparticles may trigger a similar inflammatory reaction in the brains of rats.
What does this mean? We all inhale little globs of carbon, small enough to be transmitted along with molecules that transmit smell to the brain, and they probably collect in your brain. That can't be good.

Oh yeah, Black Lung disease is still around, despite almost 35 years of legislation intended to eradicate it.

posted by Helena Montana at 12:00 PM




Dirty Bills and Censoring Congress

Rep. Doug Ose (Sacramento) has ripped off George Carlin by turning Carlin's famous "7 Words You Can't Say on Television" into an actual bill.
From the San Francisco Chronicle: Rep. Doug Ose of Sacramento has seven dirty words very much on his mind...Fed up with recent repeated instances of broadcast TV networks allowing language that many people would deem offensive to be aired live, the Republican House member has introduced a bill that spells out the seven awful words that would be banned from the public air waves in all their forms and all their meanings -- "including verb, adjective, gerund, participle, and infinitive forms,'' as the bill says.

The obvious irony is that these words are now in a congressional bill. So, if you put "asshole" or "motherfucker" into the word search feature at the Library of CongressThomas legislative database, you actually get H.R. 3687.

My question of the day is for politicians who support internet filters at public schools and libraries-- will H.R. 3687 have the unintended consequence of restricting public access to the Library of Congress? Is it now officially an "obscene" site? What about wherever else the text of this bill is printed? Inquiring minds want to know.

posted by Zoe Kentucky at 11:45 AM




Don't Ask, Don't Tell . . . Your Kids

On the bright side, this decision from the Tennessee Court of Appeals says the lower court shouldn't have tossed a guy in jail just for telling his son he (the father) is gay.

The bright side pretty much ends there, though. This is a divorce case, in which the wife filed for divorce and got the judge to issue a temporary restraining order the same day. The TRO forbade the husband "from taking the child around or otherwise exposing the child to his gay lover(s) and/or his gay lifestyle." When the wife later claimed that the husband had violated the TRO, the trial judge found that the husband hadn't willfully put the child in the presence of his lover at church (!) or at home, but he did send him to jail for a couple of days for violating the TRO by telling his son he was gay.

For obvious reasons, a TRO that is punishable by criminal contempt has to give you clear notice of what you're prohibited from doing. The appeals court said:
[T]he prohibition against 'taking the child around or otherwise exposing the child to his gay lover(s) and/or his gay lifestyle' is not so vague or overly broad as to be unenforceable. However, we find that it did not put Husband on notice that he was restrained from telling his son that he was gay. We do not read the restraining order to prohibit a statement by the father that he is gay. Thus, Husband did not have notice that he was prohibited from telling his son he was gay and therefore cannot be held in contempt for doing so.
Though it's not clear from the opinion, it seems that the trial judge could properly have forbidden the husband from disclosing his sexual orientation to his child; it's just that the TRO didn't do that in clear enough language.

In law professor style, I'll throw out a hypothetical to see if we can sort out the rationale for this legal rule. Imagine that a couple is Christian. One day, the husband announces that he's converting to Islam. The wife files for divorce. Can the court prohibit the husband from telling his kids that he's no longer a Christian? What if the couple had been Democrats and the husband switched to the GOP? And can the court forbid the husband in these cases from "exposing" the child to his new imam or the local Republican Party Chairman?

posted by Arnold P. California at 11:05 AM




Questionable Reasoning on Gay Marriage

The National Review's homophobe-in-residence, John Derbyshire, thinks that gay marriage should be banned because of Britney:
[I]f a customary social institution is trashed and trivialized by irresponsible buffoons, we ought to exert more control over it — to tighten access, not loosen it. If it turns out that there has been chicanery in the counting of votes, that is an argument for making supervision of the voting rules stricter, not for opening the voting booths to felons, foreigners, lunatics, and minors.

I wonder...does Derbyshire think that gays and lesbians are the moral equivalent of felons and lunatics where marriage is concerned, or are they merely children?

Derbyshire's second reason for opposing gay marriage? A Gay Pride parade made him uncomfortable:
Speaking as a person who has watched from the sidewalk as the Gay Pride parade made its way down Manhattan's Fifth Avenue one balmy summer's day, I have no confidence at all — not a jot, tittle, nor smidgeon of confidence, sorry — that opening up marriage to homosexuals will raise the general level of seriousness and respect which the institution enjoys in our society. The contrary effect seems to me infinitely more probable.

Poor dear.

posted by Noam Alaska at 11:02 AM




Their Stupidest Idea Yet

Bush is proposing a revamped space program that, like his tax cuts, get to be paid for by the next generation

President Bush will announce plans next week to establish a permanent human settlement on the moon and to set a goal of eventually sending Americans to Mars, administration sources said last night.

[edit]

Officials were unwilling to provide cost figures or details and would say only that Bush will direct the government to immediately begin research and development to establish a human presence or base on the moon, with the goal of having that lead to a manned mission to Mars. That endeavor could be a decade or more away, the officials said.

We don't know how much it will cost, but there is no need to worry as we won't have to pay for it for a decade or so. Which is good because that will give us time to figure out how to deal with the International Monetary Fund's warning that US deficits are threatening the stability of the global economy

With its rising budget deficit and ballooning trade imbalance, the United States is running up a foreign debt of such record-breaking proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global economy, according to a report made public today by the International Monetary Fund.

[edit]

Fund officials warned that the long-term fiscal outlook was far grimmer, predicting that underfinancing of Social Security and Medicare would lead to shortages as high as $47 trillion over the next several decades, or nearly 500 percent of the current gross domestic product in the coming decades.

For the love of God, please stop wasting our money.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:19 AM




Mr. Bungle

This statement probably won't hurt Dean too much

The excerpts shown on NBC also show Dr. Dean saying in December, 2000, "George Bush is, I believe, in his soul a moderate," and adding about those thinking that Mr. Bush's presidency would be a one-term one, "that is going to be a mistake."

He can always explain this away by saying that, in 2000, he believed Bush was moderate but subsequent events have proven otherwise.

But I don't know what he is going to say about this

Four years ago, Howard Dean denounced the Iowa caucuses as "dominated by special interests," saying on a Canadian television show that they "don't represent the centrist tendencies of the American people, they represent the extremes."

Good luck explaining that one.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:37 AM


Thursday, January 08, 2004


Third Down and Ten to Go

Though I continue to believe that the attempt to push a Federal Marriage Amendment must be resisted for many reasons, the possibility that the Constitution will actually be amended isn't one of them.

New Jersey's adoption of a civil union bill today makes three states (Vermont and Massachusetts being the others) that are clearly not going to ratify the FMA should it pass Congress. That's three down, and you need only 13 to stop an amendment. There's just no way this is going to be ratified.

Socially divisive questions are by their nature not likely to command the supermajorities required to amend the Constitution. The only two counterexamples I can think of are Prohibition (big success that was) and the post-Civil War amendments (which wouldn't have gotten through if the former Confederate states had been able to decide freely whether to ratify them).

posted by Arnold P. California at 5:41 PM




Tax Policy's Okay Too, Wes

My colleague Eugene suggested that Wesley Clark stick to foreign policy after Clark's bungled comments on judicial nominations.

Personally, I think that Clark still has lots of useful things to say on the domestic front, especially on tax policy. You can see the details here. Clark's plan does a nice job of shifting the tax burden back to the ultra-rich (those making over $1 millon a year--less than .1 percent of taxpayers) to the benefit of working families.

Clark's plan is also much more politically palatable than Dean's "cancel all the Bush tax cuts" approach because it doesn't allow the GOP to credibly charge that the plan will result in tax increases for the middle class. [Of course, that's not to say that they won't make such charges anyhow.]

And, Clark's plan has the added benefit of triggering conniption fits at the Wall Street Journal. A WSJ editorial from Wednesday calls the plan "reverse tax reform." I particularly love the way in which the editors redefined the term "reform" to mean essentially "a plan that benefits the very rich."

posted by Noam Alaska at 3:44 PM




Please Stick to Foreign Policy

Wes Clark

Democrat Wesley Clark said yesterday he would never appoint a pro-life judge to the federal bench because the judge’s anti-abortion views would render him unable to follow the established judicial precedent of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The Presidential candidate also told The Union Leader that until the moment of birth, the government has no right to influence a mother’s decision on whether to have an abortion.

“Life,” he said, “begins with the mother’s decision.”

[edit]

Clark was asked if would appoint or reject a prospective judicial nominee who passed all of Clark’s criteria but happened to be known as pro-life.

“I don’t know,” he said. “It would depend. I don’t have litmus tests. I want a guy who will do judicial precedent.”

But following the interview, Clark telephoned a reporter to clarify.

“I’m not going to be appointing judges who are pro-life,” he said.

Asked again how he will know a nominee’s position on abortion without applying a litmus test, Clark said:

“You just work through what the judge has done and if you find guys who follow judicial and established precedent, you’re not going to find a judge who is pro-life.”

Is he saying that judges who respect precedent cannot also be pro-life? You'd think a profession soldier would know better than to recklessly shoot himself in the foot in this manner.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 1:34 PM




Why Even Bother?

There is no point in even criticizing Ann Coulter anymore as she has completely lost it

Then about a month ago, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a poll showing that people who regularly attend religious services supported Bush 63 percent to 37 percent, and those who never attend religious services opposed him 62 percent to 38 percent. When you exclude blacks (as they do in Vermont), who are overwhelmingly Baptist and overwhelmingly Democratic, and rerun the numbers, basically any white person who believes in God is a Republican

That will probably come a quite a surprise to all those synagogue-attending Democrats I know.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 12:31 PM




You Are a Racist

That is the insinuation Secretary of Education Rod Paige made when he spoke at the American Enterprise Institute and compared those opposed to Bush's "No Child Left Behind" act to those who supported segregation and opposed the Brown v. Board of Education decision.

No Child Left Behind is a powerful, sweeping law. It is the logical step after Brown v. Board of Education ended segregation, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act promised an equitable society. The Ancient Greeks used to say, “Education is freedom.” Yes, it is. And No Child Left Behind is about freedom and equality and justice. It is about the way we learn about life; it is about life itself.

Because of the powerful sweep of this change, this revolution, there are some who resist. That is to be expected. The resistance to Brown was “massive” and sustained over generations. Those who fought against Brown were on the wrong side of history, just as those who fight No Child Left Behind will one day also be labeled. We have come to expect strident resistance to any major changes in education, particularly if they change the status quo and challenge the educational establishment that seeks to protect itself.

As luck would have it, 60 Minutes II did a segment last night on the so-called "Texas Miracle" that served as the framework for NCLB and propelled Paige from a Huston school superintendent to Secretary of Education

It was called the “Texas Miracle,” and you may remember it because President Bush wanted everyone to know about it during his presidential campaign.

It was about an approach to education that was showing amazing results, particularly in Houston, where dropout rates plunged and test scores soared.

Houston School Superintendent Rod Paige was given credit for the school success, by making principals and administrators accountable for how well their students did.

Once he was elected president, Mr. Bush named Paige as secretary of education. And Houston became the model for the president’s “No Child Left Behind” education reform act.

Now, as Correspondent Dan Rather reports, it turns out that some of those miraculous claims which Houston made were wrong. And it all came to light when one assistant principal took a close look at his school’s phenomenally low dropout rates – and found that they were just too good to be true.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:29 AM




Better Late Than Never

From the NYT

Twenty-five years after Vietnamese tanks rolled into this capital, putting an end to the murderous Khmer Rouge regime, a top Cambodian government official said Wednesday that the time had come to put surviving leaders on trial.

"The unfortunate Cambodians who both survived and were killed have to receive justice," the official, Chea Sim, president of the governing Cambodian People's Party, said at somber ceremonies here that recalled the end of a government that in less than four years killed about 1.7 million people, or as many as one-fourth of Cambodia's population.

If you want to know more about the Khmer Rouge, I'd recommend reading Elizabeth Becker's "When The War Was Over: Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge Revolution."

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:57 AM




Florida Fun!

Apparently virtual hanging chads do exist as Florida's voting troubles persist. There's little doubt in my mind that the 2004 election is likely to be debacle worse than 2000.

And a little further south, in a land where pigeons are chickens, this story about Key West made me smile. If you've ever been to Key West you know what I'm talking about. Not only do they have a rogue chicken population that takes the term "free range chickens" to new heights, but it's also one of the most controversial local issues on the island. You see, the chickens have a tireless advocate who is the equivalent of a crazy cat lady, only she's a crazy chicken lady. If you don't find this at all amusing, perhaps you need to go to Key West.


posted by Zoe Kentucky at 10:55 AM




Mission Accomplished

They were sent to look for WMDs and that is just what they did. They just didn't find any, so now they get to go home

The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials.

The step was described by some military officials as a sign that the administration might have lowered its sights and no longer expected to uncover the caches of chemical and biological weapons that the White House cited as a principal reason for going to war last March.

[edit]

The 400-member team withdrawn from Iraq, known as the Joint Captured Matériel Exploitation Group, was primarily composed of technical experts and was headed by an Australian brigadier, Defense Department officials said. Its work included searching weapons depots and other sites for missile launchers that might have been used with illicit weapons, the officials said, and it was withdrawn "because its work was essentially done."

"They picked up everything that was worth picking up," one official said. The weapons disposal team still in place, known as Task Force D/E, for disablement and elimination, has been used to collect suspicious material, although none has proved to be part of any illicit weapons program.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:13 AM




Darned If I Know Why the Voters Think Saddam Was Responsible for 9/11

Republican Governor George Pataki of New York has been going around the country stumping for George Bush and otherwise sucking up to the administration in hopes of getting backers for his likely 2008 presidential run. In yesterday's State of the State speech, Pataki said:
[The enemies of freedom] wage their war against freedom in the form of terror. They wage it against America, the greatest bastion of freedom, and New York, its greatest symbol.

We know what they are capable of, we know that New York will always be a target of their evil, and we know that nothing is more important than preventing them from striking again.

As New Yorkers we are fortunate to have leaders with the courage to confront this threat with force.

On behalf of the people of New York, I want to thank President Bush for his strong support of our security efforts, and commend him for his determination to take this war to the spider holes of Tikrit and away from our city streets.
By the way, as a denizen of lower Manhattan (my office was across the street from the WTC, and I live close enough to walk to work), I find it ironic that most of the "people of New York" who would be willing to have Pataki speak on their behalf live in upstate counties hundreds of miles from Ground Zero. Pataki certainly gets votes from the NYC area, particularly Long Island, but the city (apart from Staten Island) is overwhelmingly Democratic. Maybe the upstaters are happy with Bush's domestic security policies, but I doubt that a large proportion of those of us who actually live and work down here would second Pataki's claim that Bush has stongly supported our security efforts.

This is one reason why the Necropublican convention in NYC near the 9/11 anniversary may backfire: apart from the fact that most New Yorkers simply disagree with Bush's policies and wouldn't vote for him in any case, a lot of them feel bitter, angry, or betrayed at how he has shafted the city since 9/11 and used a tragedy that happened here to justify all sorts of things that are opposed by many or most of the people most directly affected by the attacks. The intensity and volatility of those emotions may make the city something of a powder keg during the convention, though I profoundly hope no one sets off the spark.

posted by Arnold P. California at 9:57 AM




Is Our Propaganda Failing?

From the Washington Post

Nine months after U.S. forces closed Iraq's state-run television stations and subsequently launched the new channel with promises of a democratic dawn for the country's news media, the Pentagon-sponsored station has not won the trust of many Iraqis. By seeking to cast the U.S. occupation in the most favorable light, al-Iraqiya may actually be losing the war for viewers' hearts and minds.

[edit]

Media critics and many ordinary Iraqis agree that the station has yet to seriously tackle many problems now bedeviling everyday life, such as gas lines, electricity shortages and street crime. Alaa Juburi, a correspondent and producer who recently left al-Iraqiya to work for a U.S. television network in Baghdad, said local reporters should be grilling Iraqi ministers about these problems but are reluctant to challenge them.

Instead, the station provides an open forum for U.S. and Iraqi officials. In a program that aired several times last week, two spokesmen from the U.S. provisional administration and the Governing Council were shown over coffee at a local restaurant, talking for a half-hour about U.S. plans to transfer political control this year. Station officials said this was part of al-Iraqiya's mission to inform the public.

Coupled with a flat, drab presentation that Iraqis say is reminiscent of the grim newscasts of the Hussein era, al-Iraqiya's staid news judgment is costing it viewers. An October survey conducted for the State Department in seven cities found that 63 percent of Iraqis with satellite dishes preferred getting their news from either al-Jazeera or al-Arabiya -- the leading Arabic satellite channels -- while only 12 percent chose al-Iraqiya.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:51 AM


Wednesday, January 07, 2004


Leave No Dakar Behind?

Justice William Bedsworth of California writes a hilarious monthly column called "A Criminal Waste of Space." The latest is on Measure G, an initiative that passed in the California town of Bolinas with almost 70% of the vote.

The text of Measure G:
Vote for Bolinas to be a socially acknowledged nature-loving town because to like to drink the water out of the lakes to like to eat the blueberries to like the bears is not hatred to hotels and motor boats. Dakar. Temporary and way to save life, skunks and foxes (airplanes to go over the ocean) and to make it beautiful.
Read Bedsworth's whole column, which is not only as funny as always but also tells a story that's kind of sweet.

posted by Arnold P. California at 7:57 PM




I'm Joining The Federalist Society

Not really, but this does sound pretty interesting

DOES THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECT FACT-BASED SPEECH THAT COULD BE MISLEADING?

The Federalist Society's Free Speech and Election Law Practice group will host a panel discussion on the First Amendment protection of fact-based but potentially misleading speech.

Unfortunately, it turns out that the discussion is going to focus on product liability lawsuits where the "allegations do not turn on falsity, but instead on the misleading nature of the speech even though it may be literally true."

I just hope that this sort of thing never gets outlawed, as saying literally true things in a manner designed to intentionally mislead people is the basic communications strategy of every politician, organization and special interest group in DC.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:53 PM




Howard Dean's Religion

Howard Dean has come under fire from Democratic rivals and right-wingers for a host of reasons -- his position on the Iraq War, tax cuts, his military record (or lack thereof), and so on. I suppose it's unexpected that the list would eventually expand to include Dean's religion. In a column written just before the year's end, such an attack was made by Cal Thomas in the Washington Times.

In the column, Thomas wrote:
"Mr. Dean is from a Congregationalist background, a liberal denomination that does not believe in ministerial authority or church hierarchy. Each Congregationalist believes he is in direct contact with God and is entitled to sort out truth for himself. Mr. Dean's wife is Jewish and his two children are being raised Jewish, which is strange at best, considering the two faiths take a distinctly different view of Jesus."
A-ha! Dean not only embraces liberal politics, but a "liberal" religion. (Holy ideology, Batman! Dean's a double-liberal!) That's quite an expose, Cal.

The best response to Thomas' column was provided by fellow blogger Michael Totten. Incidentally, Totten declares that he isn't a Dean supporter. Nonetheless, the former Vermont governor should appreciate Totten's response to Thomas:
"What's strange at best is that Cal Thomas even mentions this in the first place.

"I'd like to know what wouldn't be 'strange,' considering the makeup of Howard Dean's family. Are Christians automatically entitled to come out ahead of Jews in religious disputes? Are part-Jewish children supposed to ignore half their heritage? I'll be charitable and assume that's what he's getting at, although that in itself means he has some explaining to do. Christian supremacy isn't the endearing quality that it used to be. The only other explanation is that Mr. Thomas thinks Howard Dean shouldn't have married a Jew in the first place."


posted by Frederick Maryland at 2:34 PM




Jonah Goldberg: Reverse Psychologist or Simple Idiot?

Sausage-Neck Goldberg's piece in today's Washington Times may or may not part of some vast right-wing reverse psychological experiment whereby they pretend to want Dean to win the nomination so that Bush can trounce him in the general election.

I don't know if they really believe this, or if they actually fear Dean and are trying to pretend otherwise - I suspect that it is the former. Either way, when Goldberg says things like this

As an American, I should hope that the best, most qualified, candidate gets the Democratic nomination on the chance he might become president. In that sense, Joe Lieberman should be my guy.

I am inclined to take him at his word. And it provides just one more reason why I would never vote for Lieberman.

Anyway, after asserting that "Dean is probably the worst choice of a pretty awful field," Goldberg proceeds to attempt to mock him thusly

He says such amazingly crazy things, he's just so much more entertaining than the ever-cautious Gephardt. For example, Dean recently said that he didn't want to "prejudge" Osama bin Laden's guilt or innocence since he'd have to face a "jury trial."

Can you imagine FDR declaring he didn't want to "pre-judge" Hitler? The comment was a parody of conservative complaints about the Democratic Party's approach to the war on terror; they see it as a pesky law-enforcement problem.

I don't expect Sausage-Neck Goldberg to actually bother tracking down the actual quote, but I did and here it is

"I've resisted pronouncing a sentence before guilt is found," Dean said. "I still have this old-fashioned notion that even with people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials. So I'm sure that is the correct sentiment of most Americans, but I do think if you're running for president, or if you are president, it's best to say that the full range of penalties should be available. But it's not so great to prejudge the judicial system."

That seems pretty reasonable to me. But if you support an administration that prefers to simply declare people guilty and then detain them indefinitely, I can see how this would sound crazy to you.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:34 PM




Sodomy=Cannibalism?

In Justice Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, he argued that overturning the Lone Star State's sodomy statute meant that other laws regulating human behavior (specifically "state laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity") are also destined for the scrap heap. Now, Theodore Dalrymple at City Journal comes up with something else to keep bestiality company in a piece titled "The Case for Cannibalism: If everything is permissible between consenting adults, why not?"

It's true that Dalrymple doesn't mention the terms sodomy or homosexuality, but his piece makes it clear that he's Scalia's ideological soulmate (no, not in that way).

posted by Noam Alaska at 1:57 PM




Standards vs. Practices

If possessing nuclear weapons or WMDs or supporting terrorists were grounds for war in Iraq, Ivan Eland wants to know why we are not only NOT going to war with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt but, instead, actively supporting them.

The Bush administration’s rhetorical justifications for invading Iraq (after the threat from Iraq’s unconventional weapons was debunked) were to end a brutal regime and set an example to inspire the “democratization” of the Middle East. But continued Bush administration support for equally brutal, but “friendly,” regimes reveals the hypocrisy of those justifications and the emptiness of the administration’s goal of spreading democracy.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 1:00 PM




The Slow Crawl to Justice

Most of the issues that are involved in the issues of equal justice and rights of the accused have to do with what happens inside the courtoom -- the makeup of juries, the admissibility of evidence, judges' instructions to jurors, etc. But something's wrong when it is virtually impossible for a defendant in a criminal proceeding to make it into the courtroom.

That's what happened a few years ago when George Lane was summoned to appear in a county court in Tennessee. The courtroom is one of dozens in Tennessee counties that are not accessible to those who must use wheelchairs -- a clear violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. For this reason, Lane had to crawl his way up two flights of stairs to reach the courtroom.

Later, after he was summoned to a follow-up hearing at the courthouse, he appeared in the courthouse's lower level, but refused to suffer this indignity again. Although he informed the judge that he was downstairs and inside the courthouse building, Lane was arrested for not appearing inside the actual courtroom.

Lane's case goes before the U.S. Supreme Court next week. Tennessee is using the doctrine of "states' rights" to challenge the ADA. More on what's at stake in this op-ed by Jim Ward of the National Coalition for Disability Rights.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:11 PM




I Am Confused

This Washington Post article from December 24th reports that the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board conducted an investigation into how allegations that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium from an unnamed country in Africa ended up in Bush's State of the Union address.

Their conclusion was that

[T]here was "no deliberate effort to fabricate" a story, the source said. Instead, the source said, the board believes the White House was so anxious "to grab onto something affirmative" about Hussein's nuclear ambitions that it disregarded warnings from the intelligence community that the claim was questionable.

Be that as it may, I was confused by this sentence

The CIA and the State Department had doubts about the purported Niger information because they knew that Hussein already had a stockpile of the same type of uranium that he was supposed to be seeking.

The CIA and State Department knew that Hussein has stockpiles of uranium? If that is the case, why didn't Bush just say that in the SOTU? Why make the Africa allegation? If the point is to imply that Hussein is seeking to build a nuclear bomb, wouldn't asserting that he already has the necessary material be more convincing then alleging that he merely attempted to purchase said material?

And, more importantly, if they "knew" that Hussein has this material stockpiled, why haven't arms investigators found it?

posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:50 AM




More Nazis

Yesterday, I noted the differing levels of outrage and attention (very little vs. a cartload full) directed at the Grover Norquist and MoveOn Nazi incidents.

Tapped points out another instance of Nazi name calling. In a column last week, New York Post columnist Ralph Peters used a bunch of colorful phrases to describe Howard Dean and his supporters, including: Dean's Internet Gestapo, Dean's Flannelshirts (like Hiter's Brownshirts--geddit?), Goebbels, and my personal favorite, Herr Howie.

How much mainstream media attention have these remarks received? Aside from a mention on CNN's Newsnight, none whatsoever.

posted by Noam Alaska at 11:38 AM




Lieberman Needs to Take His Own Advice

From the NPR debate

We've got to unite our party in the first instance, and you have to send a message of unity, constructive ideas and hope. That's the way to beat George Bush's negativism and extremism and divisiveness.

America suffers when we're not united.

Good point, but it loses all meaning when it is immediately proceeded by this

CONAN: You talk about polarizers. Are there polarizers in this room?

LIEBERMAN: I'm afraid Howard Dean has said a number of things that are polarizing. He has represented anger. Anger has fueled his campaign.

I love the enthusiasm of his supporters. He's done an incredible service to our party and our political system by bringing a lot of them in, but we've got to go beyond that.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:47 AM




Is Joe Trippi a Hypocrite?

Probably. Consider this

A senior adviser to Howard Dean accused two rival campaigns on Tuesday of harassing Dr. Dean's supporters here with a relentless flurry of telephone calls intended to disrupt his organizing strategy for the upcoming Iowa caucuses.

The adviser, Joe Trippi, Dr. Dean's campaign manager, said that dozens of Dr. Dean's fervent supporters had each received as many as 20 computerized phone calls over the past weekend from the campaigns of Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts and Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri.

All the campaigns are pushing hard to identify and mobilize supporters. Mr. Trippi accused the two rival campaigns of trying to frustrate Dr. Dean's supporters so they would not answer the phone, making it difficult for Dr. Dean to recruit precinct captains on caucus night.

Outrageous? Hardly. Now consider this

In early October [1983], a young Mondale aide named Joe Trippi shows up in Des Moines to check on Mondale's Iowa field operation. What he finds there horrifies him. Somehow the Iowa team has allowed the rival campaign of California Senator Alan Cranston to nearly corner the market on tickets to the JJ dinner, an annual affair designed to raise money for the Iowa state Democratic Party.

[edit]

When it comes down to it, Trippi is going to have to get his hands on tickets that have already been sold. Cranston tickets. Lots of them. And yet, once he accepts that proposition, the solution is almost elegant in its simplicity: What's to stop him from just marching right up to Cranston's people and asking for them?

"We started really early in the day," Trippi remembers, reflecting on how he and an Iowa colleague named Tom Cosgrove solved their JJ problem. "They stopped about three miles out [from] the staging area--the Mondale buses coming from Minnesota or wherever they were coming from." What follows is one of the most ambitious political makeovers in history. A team of Mondale aides, led by Cosgrove, plasters the bus with Cranston paraphernalia--stickers, posters, buttons, everything. Three miles down the road, the bus pulls up to the Cranston tent, where a Mondale/Cranston supporter gets out and tells a real Cranston aide he has 52 people on the bus. The aide looks up at the bus, surely admiring the military-like discipline that has brought a busload of Cranston supporters from "Los Angeles or wherever" out to the middle of Iowa this early in the day, and quietly congratulates himself. He promptly hands over 52 tickets.

And it continues like this, through bus after bus of Mondale supporters: Stop three miles up the highway, lather the bus in Cranston paraphernalia, drive on to the Cranston tent, claim your tickets. And the Cranston campaign just keeps forking them over. Happily. Hell, the more buses that show up, the more impressed the Cranston people are by their own handiwork. Never does it occur to them that these busloads of supporters aren't the genuine article. At least not until the real Cranston buses start showing up. "Twenty buses pull up, and they're out of tickets," Trippi says, still amused at the spectacle almost 20 years later. "More Cranston buses keep pulling up, and they don't have the tickets anymore."

Unless they top this stunt, I say let's hear no more complaints of "dirty tricks" from Trippi.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:33 AM




We Did Not Go To War Over "Weapons Programs"

Though the Washington Post article makes it clear that Iraq wanted to produce banned weapons, and in many cases took the necessary preliminary steps to do so, it is important to remember that they did not succeed.

So

The nine-month record of arms investigators since the fall of Baghdad includes discoveries of other concealed arms research, most of it less advanced. Iraq's former government engaged in abundant deception about its ambitions and, in some cases, early steps to prepare for development or production. Interviews here -- among Iraqi weaponeers and investigators from the U.S. and British governments -- turned up unreported records, facilities or materials that could have been used in unlawful weapons.

But

[I]investigators have found no support for the two main fears expressed in London and Washington before the war: that Iraq had a hidden arsenal of old weapons and built advanced programs for new ones. In public statements and unauthorized interviews, investigators said they have discovered no work on former germ-warfare agents such as anthrax bacteria, and no work on a new designer pathogen -- combining pox virus and snake venom -- that led U.S. scientists on a highly classified hunt for several months. The investigators assess that Iraq did not, as charged in London and Washington, resume production of its most lethal nerve agent, VX, or learn to make it last longer in storage. And they have found the former nuclear weapons program, described as a "grave and gathering danger" by President Bush and a "mortal threat" by Vice President Cheney, in much the same shattered state left by U.N. inspectors in the 1990s.

A review of available evidence, including some not known to coalition investigators and some they have not made public, portrays a nonconventional arms establishment that was far less capable than U.S. analysts judged before the war. Leading figures in Iraqi science and industry, supported by observations on the ground, described factories and institutes that were thoroughly beaten down by 12 years of conflict, arms embargo and strangling economic sanctions. The remnants of Iraq's biological, chemical and missile infrastructures were riven by internal strife, bled by schemes for personal gain and handicapped by deceit up and down lines of command. The broad picture emerging from the investigation to date suggests that, whatever its desire, Iraq did not possess the wherewithal to build a forbidden armory on anything like the scale it had before the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Why might the US and others have thought Iraq had banned weapons and WMDs?

In every field of special weaponry, Iraqi designers and foreign investigators said, such deceit was endemic. Program managers promised more than they could deliver, or things they could not deliver at all, to advance careers, preserve jobs or conduct intrigues against rivals. Sometimes they did so from ignorance, failing to grasp the challenges they took on.

Lying to an absolute ruler was hazardous, Iraqi weaponeers said, but less so in some cases than the alternatives. "No one will tell Saddam Hussein to his face, 'I can't do this,' " said an Iraqi brigadier general who supervised work on some of the technologies used in the rail gun.

David Kay's survey group has turned up other such cases. Analysts are calling the phenomenon "red-on-red deception," after the U.S. practice of using red to stand for enemy forces and blue to stand for friendly ones. In some cases, they said, "red on red" amounted to "red on blue" -- because Western intelligence collected the same false reports that fooled Hussein.

I don't know if the Bush administration knew Iraq did not possess banned weapons and lied to the American people or if they were simply victims of inaccurate intelligence that lead to faulty conclusions. I suspect it is the former, but in either case, there can be no doubt that Hussein did not possess any WMDs that posed any threat to the United States.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:57 AM


Tuesday, January 06, 2004


I Asked For It

Yesterday, I complained that pundits have jumped too eagerly on to the Howard-Dean-is-George-McGovern bandwagon, and I urged them to come up with more creative historical analogues to Dean. I'm pleased to report that the National Review's Jonah Goldberg has obliged me. Today, he likens Dean to W's father, George H. W. Bush. Goldberg sees both men as aloof, arrogant, and phony.

Rather than attack the heart of Goldberg's argument--I've already responded to the Dean-is-a-phony meme in a previous post--allow me to nitpick around the edges....

First, Goldberg notes one difference between Bush I and Dean:
Of course it is also true that when his nation went to war George H. W. Bush signed up to be one of the youngest combat pilots in American history, while Howard Dean responded to the war of his youth by hitting the slopes of Aspen to endure a grueling therapeutic regimen for his lower back.

It strikes me as amazing the wingers continue to criticize Dean's war record--or lack thereof--given that their guy's Vietnam record is arguably much worse.

Second, Goldberg repeatedly pokes fun at Dean's appearance: "his ability to enlarge the veins in his neck like grape-jelly-infused sausage casings whenever he talks about the president," "sausage-neck Dean," etc. It's a bit hypocritical for Goldberg to offer up such crass insults in one sentence only to disparage the "astounding nastiness of [Dean's] style of politics" in the next. Besides, to my eyes at least, Jonah isn't exactly fashion model material himself [full disclosure: neither am I]. Please feel free to chime in if you feel differently.

posted by Noam Alaska at 6:19 PM




Electability and the Money Gap

Last night in Missouri, President Bush just tucked away another $2.8 million in political contributions -- this time, from an event that was the largest single political fundraiser in Missouri. The Bush-Cheney Re-Election campaign now has a bankroll that exceeds $120 million.

The Democrats don't need to match Bush's fundraising prowess dollar for dollar, but it's safe to say that they need to minimize the gap between their war chest and the GOP's. Getting outspent by a ratio of 3-to-2 is one thing; being outspent by 3-to-1 is another.

The point I'm making puts the issue of "electability" in a whole new (and more appropriate) context. As you know, Senator Joe Lieberman and some other Democratic rivals keep suggesting that Dean is not electable in a matchup with Bush.

Yet, consider the fact that Dean and John Kerry are the only two Democratic hopefuls who have said they will not comply with voluntary federal spending limits -- a decision that restricts their access to matching funds, but frees them to raise amounts of money that would help minimize the Bush-Dems' money gap.

For all of his tough "hawkish" rhetoric on Iraq, it's ironic that Lieberman would choose to voluntarily disarm his campaign in financial terms. Were one of them the nominee, Lieberman and the other six candidates (Dean and Kerry excepted) would be in an especially poor position to get their message out to voters with direct-mail, TV ads, and travel-related costs.

So, the next time you hear Lieberman et al talking about "electability," consider the bigger picture.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 3:24 PM




Congratulations to the World's Biggest Asshole

His unprecedented re-redistricting of Texas has survived a judicial challenge. The 127-page pdf of the court's opinion is here.

This is unquestionably headed for the Supreme Court, which will be asked on a very expedited basis for an injunction against the new map because there's not much more than a week left before candidates have to register for the March primaries.

I find this paragraph from the majority opinion (written by the conservative Judge Higginbotham of the Fifth Circuit) quite interesting, and I look forward to reading the rest of the opinion:
We decide only the legality of Plan 1374C, not its wisdom. Whether the Texas Legislature has acted in the best interest of Texas is a judgment that belongs to the people who elected the officials whose act is challenged in this case. Nor does the reality that this is a reprise of the act of the 1991 State Legislature weigh with the court’s decision beyond its marker of the impact of the computer-drawn map. This extraordinary change in the ability to slice thin the lines brings welcome assistance, but comes with a high cost of creating much greater potential for abuse. Congress can assist by banning mid-decade redistricting, which it has the clear constitutional authority to do, as many states have done. In Texas, the phenomenon is new but already old. The larger lesson of 1991 and 2003 is that the only check upon these grasps of power lie with the voter. But, perversely, these seizures entail political moves that too often dance close to avoiding the recall of the disagreeing voter. We know it is rough and tumble politics, and we are ever mindful that the judiciary must call the fouls without participating in the game. We must nonetheless express concern that in the age of technology this is a very different game.
This is an example of what I'd call judicial restraint. The judge is basically conceding that he's personally uncomfortable with allowing the map to stand and has serious doubts about whether the re-redistricting is good policy, but he's going to leave those questions up to the legislature and the voters.

Just because it's restrained doesn't mean its right, of course. Many constitutional theorists would say that because gerrymandering can make it difficult or impossible for the voters to punish the misbehaving legislators, the courts shouldn't defer to the political process. Judge Higginbotham leans in that direction in the bolded sentence, but ultimately decides to stay out of it.

One of the three judges dissented in part, but on most issues it's unanimous.

Stay tuned.

Update: In my haste, I mistakenly thought the majority opinion was authored by Judge Higginbotham. In fact, it was authored jointly by Judge Higginbotham and Judge Rosenthal.

posted by Arnold P. California at 3:10 PM




Major Combat Operations Are Over

Anyone remember Afghanistan? You know, with the Taliban and al-Qaida? The folks who actually had something to do with 9/11?

Well, while our attention has been diverted to fighting people who didn't have anything to do with 9/11, the evildoers behind the Attack that Changed Everything haven't exactly conceded defeat.
Eight schoolchildren are amongst at least 13 people killed in a bomb blast in the Afghan city of Kandahar.

Nearly 60 others were injured in the explosion, security officials say.

Kandahar is the spiritual home of the ousted Taleban militia which governed Afghanistan until a US-led invasion in 2001.

Supporters and remnants of the Taleban have been blamed for rising violence and instability in the region.

Spokesmen for the Taleban movement have declared a holy war against foreign aid workers and soldiers in Afghanistan.

Tuesday's explosions came minutes before the governor of Kandahar's province, Yusuf Pashtun, was to pass through the area, the AFP agency reports.
The AP adds:
[A police official] said at least two of those most badly hurt were taken to the U.S. military base at Kandahar Air Field for treatment.

U.S. troops moving between the air field and a base in the city housing a new joint civilian-military reconstruction team regularly use the road where the bomb was laid.

Southern and eastern Afghanistan have been plagued with a stream of shootings, kidnappings and bomb blasts against civilians as well as soldiers, many of the them claimed by Taliban.
Dubya is a big baseball fan. He should know how important it is to keep your eye on the ball.

posted by Arnold P. California at 2:37 PM




Nazis in the News

It appears that fascism is having a resurgence of sorts. While it is often common to hear critics compare political opponents to Hitler, there have been some particularly high profile examples of late.

In today's Washington Post, commentator Richard Cohen denouces right-wing power broker Grover Norquist for likening the estate tax to the Holocaust:
This remark, so bizarre and tasteless that I felt it deserved checking, sent me to the transcript of the show, where, sure enough, it was confirmed. In it Norquist referred to the supposedly specious argument that the estate tax was worth keeping because it really affected only "2 percent of Americans." He went on: "I mean, that's the morality of the Holocaust. 'Well, it's only a small percentage,' you know. I mean, it's not you. It's somebody else."

Mind you, Cohen is a bit tardy in his criticism, given that Norquist made his remarks back in October. Still, better late than never.

Meanwhile, today's New York Times reports on angry GOP response to comparisons between Adolf Hitler and George W. Bush on MoveOn.org:

The left-leaning Internet group MoveOn.org sponsored a contest, "Bush in 30 Seconds," inviting people to submit television advertisements about Mr. Bush, with the best to be determined by a vote of visitors to the site.

But two of more than 1,500 submissions have outraged Republicans and leading Jewish groups for comparing Mr. Bush, in profile and policy, to Hitler.

"This is the worst and most vile form of political hate speech," Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said in one of several statements he issued.

These two incidents have certain fairly obvious similarities--specifically the use of amazingly over-the-top rhetoric to score political points. As much as I dislike Bush administration policies, as much as I think that they are destructive, comparisons to Nazi Germany are beyond the pale. As Samuel L. Jackson said in Pulp Fiction the two aren't "in the same ballpark. They are not in the same league. They are not even in the same motherf***ing sport."

However, the incidents also diverge in a couple of important respects. The estate tax comment was made by one of the most powerful men in Washington and yet it received almost no attention from the mainstream media. A Factiva search for news articles from the past six months mentioning Norquist, estate tax, and the Holocaust yields only four hits--and that includes Cohen's column and the original NPR transcript. Meanwhile, the MoveOn.com contest entrants are political nobodies--wacko straw men that the Right always props up to demonize liberals generally. MoveOn didn't produce the ads and the group apologized for the ads' appearance on their web site. And, in the past two days, there have been 34 separate Factiva hits for the terms MoveOn, Bush, and Hitler. And, believe me, that's only the beginning. Undoubtedly the Hannitys and O'Reillys of this world will add more fuel to the fire tonight.

So, what can we learn from this? A few things spring to mind:
* the media isn't anywhere near as liberal as it is cracked up to be
* liberals are more likely to apologize for things--even things not entirely their fault--than conservatives are
* Republicans are a whole hell of a lot better at rousing the rabble than Democrats are


posted by Noam Alaska at 1:48 PM




Another Reason I'm Not Moving to Texas

The Texas 24-hour cable news network's website links to the following departments on its State News pages (free registration required):
State News Home
Lottery
Talkback
Texas Executions
Texana/Travel
"Weather" would be fine; "Politics" also wouldn't raise an eyebrow. But a regular page devoted to executions? And the page isn't short of news. Today's headline is "Texas sets first execution of 2004," and there are five other recent stories. Plus permanent links to the following:
• Scheduled executions
• Offenders on death row
• Executed offenders
• Executions by year
• More death row information
Now that's what I call compassionate conservatism.

posted by Arnold P. California at 1:17 PM




Oops, My Bad
Dad accused of killing girl he mistook for wife's lover

A northeast Houston man has been charged with fatally stabbing his 13-year-old daughter, whom he mistook for the lover he believed his wife had been visiting, police said.

Prudencio Mendez Vasquez, 46, of the 10500 block of Onslow is charged with murder and aggravated assault in the death of his daughter, Michelle, and the wounding of his wife, Micaela, 41. Police said Vasquez slipped into the back of his wife's parked pickup and, evidently believing her boyfriend was in the front passenger seat, stabbed the girl repeatedly about 11:30 p.m. Sunday.

When Vasquez discovered what he had done, investigators said, he stabbed his wife, then himself before a passer-by grabbed the knife and called police. Vasquez remained in fair condition Monday at Ben Taub Hospital. His wife was treated and released.
I guess I shouldn't feel so bad any more when I mistake one of my identical twin daughters for the other.

posted by Arnold P. California at 12:39 PM




Labor Dept.: "Don't Play With Matches, But Here's How to Play With Matches"

After touting how its new rules on overtime pay will raise the earnings of 1.3 million low-wage workers, the Bush administration is now telling employers how they can effectively wipe out raises for those workers.

The Bush administration's Labor Department has offered employers some helpful advice on how to cut their payroll costs under the new overtime rules. According to the Associated Press:
"While touting the $895 million in increased wages it says [1.3 million] workers would be guaranteed from the changes, the Labor Department is suggesting ways employers can keep their labor costs from going up.

Among the options: cut workers' hourly wages and add the overtime to equal the original salary, or raise salaries to the new $22,100 annual threshold, making them ineligible.

The department says it is merely listing well-known choices available to employers, even under current law.

"We're not saying anybody should do any of this,'' said Labor Department spokesman Ed Frank.
No, of course not. You're just showing them how to do it. If a parent followed this (twisted) reasoning, he or she would tell a child, "Here's how to light a match, but don't play with matches."

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:29 PM




It's Official -- Bill Bradley Endorses Dean

Al Gore and Bill Bradley tangled with each other in the 2000 Democratic primaries over a number of issues. But, apparently, they agree on at least one thing -- Howard Dean is the right choice for Dems. ABC News' website has a story on the endorsement right here.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:17 PM




Betting on Politics

This is a scenerio on which I would like to hear your opinions.

Sen. Arlen Specter is running for re-election in 2004. In the primary, he is running against Pat Toomey, who has the support of conservatives like Robert Bork, Steve Forbes and Ed Meese. He and his supporters view Specter as a liberal Republican too willing to side with the Democrats, but President Bush has voiced his support for Specter in his bid for re-election. Whoever wins the primary faces off against Democratic candidate Joe Hoeffel.

Now, normally, if I were to give money to a candidate in this race, I'd give it to Hoeffel. But I have been thinking of giving some to Specter during the primary, partly because Republicans are trying to force all of the moderate members out of office and I prefer moderate Republicans like Specter to lunatics like Toomey. But beyond that, Specter is slated to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee if he gets re-elected and Republicans maintain control of the Senate. Again, in a situation such as that, I would prefer to see Specter in control of the committee rather than any other Republican, especially since all the right-wingers are hysterical about this possibility.

But now the question arises as to whether it is better for the Democratic candidate to face a moderate like Specter or a conservative like Toomey. I'd like to see Specter beat Toomey, but I'd prefer, above all, to see Hoeffel get elected and he probably has a better chance against Toomey than against Specter, so a Toomey primary victory is preferable. But if Toomey wins the primary and then ends up winning the general election, that is a much worse result than either Hoeffel or Specter winning.

Anyway, I was just wondering if giving Specter money is a good idea and would like to hear your thoughts.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 12:03 PM




The Idiot of the Week Award Goes to...

.... U.S. Rep. Ralph Hall, the Texas Democrat who just switched his affiliation to the Republican Party. (Check Eugene's post for more details.) And, no, this award isn't given to Hall simply because of his decision to switch political parties. The award is richly deserved by Hall because of the lame reason he gave for changing parties.

In an interview with the Associated Press, Hall said, "I've always said that if being a Democrat hurt my district I would switch or I would resign." He added that House GOP leaders recently denied his district funding for a federal project and "the only reason I was given was I was a Democrat."

Does this guy's elevator go all the way to the top? Everyone knows that the majority party in a legislative chamber has power and leverage that the minority party does not. The majority party chairs every committee and can routinely direct money through appropriations bills in ways that disproportionately benefit members of the majority party. In the U.S. House, that majority party has been Republican ever since January 1995.

In other words, districts represented by Democrats in the House have been shortchanged for the past nine years. Did it take Congressman Hall this many years to figure that out?

One final point: Whatever happened to being a Republican or a Democrat because that particular party reflects your core political values? Oh, damn, there I go being idealistic again. How could I forget that serving in Congress is really just like receiving a limitless GAP gift card that entitles you to go "shopping" on behalf of your district? Before the passage of the Income Tax and the era of federal pork-barrel spending, what the hell did congressmen like Daniel Webster and Henry Clay do with their time?

Congressman Hall is an imbecile. And he's finally found that most of his fellow imbeciles reside in the other party.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:01 PM




Well, If You Say So

From the Wall Street Journal

The head of the Army Corps of Engineers quietly exonerated Halliburton Co. of any wrongdoing in a Kuwait fuel-delivery contract that Pentagon auditors asserted has overcharged the U.S. government by more than $100 million.

In a previously undisclosed Dec. 19 ruling, the commander of the Corps, Lt. Gen. Robert Flowers, cleared Halliburton's Kellogg Brown & Root subsidiary of the need to provide "any cost and pricing data" pertaining to a no-bid contract to deliver millions of gallons of gasoline from Kuwait to Iraq.

He acted after lower-level Army Corps officials concluded in a memo to him that Kellogg Brown & Root had provided enough data to show it had purchased the fuel and its delivery to Iraq at a "fair and reasonable price."

Nevermind the fact that Defense Department auditors alleged that KBR was significantly overcharging - if a low-level Army Corps official says they did nothing wrong, that is good enough for me.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:20 AM




The World's Biggest Asshole Preaches Tolerance and Moderation

For Democrats, that is.

Here are DeLay's remarks regarding Texas Rep. Ralph Hall's decision to leave the Democratic Party and become a Republican

"Democrats are reaping what they've sown," DeLay said. "Their leaders have lined up behind Howard Dean's brand of angry, intolerant politics. They've made their message clear: 'moderates need not apply' and that's a sad trend for a once-great party."

Behind all this noble-sounding claptrap is this fact

"I've always said that if being a Democrat hurt my district I would switch or I would resign," Hall said in an interview with The Associated Press. He said GOP leaders had recently refused to place money for his district in a spending bill and "the only reason I was given was I was a Democrat."

Since House Republicans were punishing Hall for being a Democrat, and DeLay and Company just gerrymandered Texas specifically in order to oust Democrats from office, it is not hard to see why Hall switched.

The day DeLay welcomes "moderates" into the GOP is the day ... well, it just ain't gonna happen.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:34 AM




The Contorted Language of Government Meets "Mad Cow"

No wonder so many ordinary Americans loathe and fear government. The top officials in government seem congenitally unable to speak the same language as the masses. The federal government's actions and statements concerning "mad cow" disease (also known as BSE) are a good example.

On December 26 at a U.S. Department of Agriculture briefing, the USDA's chief veterinary officer, Dr. Ron DeHaven, explained the actions that the USDA might take to ensure that BSE has not spread beyond the single cow that was found to be infected in Washington State. Dr. DeHaven's lengthy remarks included this bizarre statement:
"We have at this point not made any decisions on the disposition of the herd as to whether we would depopulate any or part of that herd."
Depopulate? Uh, Doctor, I believe "kill" or at least "slaughter" would be the appropriate term. Using a term like "depopulate" implies that USDA is testing a livestock version of the morning-after pill, and that's definitely not what's happening here.

Incidentally, if you read your morning newspaper, you noticed that the government has announced that it has finally reached a decision on the herd. According to The Washington Post, federal officials have "decided to kill 450 quarantined calves from a Washington state herd that includes the offspring of the animal found to have the nation's first known case of mad cow disease." Apparently, the Post is working from a different dictionary.

Not to worry. Dr. DeHaven was at it again, discussing in a phone briefing what he called this decision by the USDA to "depopulate" the herd. Good grief.


posted by Frederick Maryland at 10:33 AM




Religion and Politics

When the article on Dean's new willingness to discuss his religion on the campaign trail showed up in the Washington Post this weekend, I was not particularly pleased for a wide variety of reasons that I have been unable to concisely explain.

Now, via Steve at Southern Appeal, I learn of this James Pinkerton piece in the Los Angeles Times in which he makes the important point that this tactic isn't even going to help him and might end up simply alienating some of this supporters

[B]efore Dean ventures too far into territory that's obviously unfamiliar to him, he might pause and realize that those who prefer theocracy to democracy have already anointed their candidate — and he isn't it.

[edit]

Indeed, those who declaim the loudest about their faith have already anointed Bush as their chosen candidate for 2004. On Friday, televangelist Pat Robertson announced that God had told him that "George Bush is going to win in a walk … the Lord has just blessed him."

Among such voters, Dean doesn't have a prayer. So he might as well run at least honestly, as the candidate of Democrats, not theocrats.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:52 AM




Howard Ahmanson Drives a Prius?

If you're familiar enough with the man to find this funny, then you probably don't need to read Salon's top story. If not, you should go there now.

posted by Helena Montana at 8:57 AM


Monday, January 05, 2004


No Comment
WASHINGTON (AP) -- About 7,000 U.S. soldiers in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan who were planning to retire or otherwise leave the service in the next few months are getting new marching orders: Stay put.

The Army is expanding what it calls a "stop loss" order to keep soldiers in uniform - even those who have met their contractual service obligation or are scheduled to retire - during a rotation of tens of thousands of troops that begins this month and is scheduled to finish in May.





posted by Arnold P. California at 7:59 PM




Oooh, Gross
Anatomy exhibit's real bodies prove popular draw

The event, supported by such organizations as the Japanese Medical Association, aims to promote understanding about the human body and general health. It takes the rare approach of displaying real bodies and body parts, even allowing visitors to touch some of them.

The exhibition displays 16 fully dissected bodies and 160 body parts, including hearts, brains and digestive systems. One body is sliced into 2-cm-thick sections from the top of the head all the way down to its toes. Seven embryos are also on show.
What I found most interesting about this article was the apparent fact that women find this exhibit much more appealing than do men.
"It's so soft. . . . Not meaty at all!" exclaimed Yumi Katagiri, 24, as she inserted her finger in a body's stomach.

"I was really curious (about the exhibit)," said her friend, Chifumi Magoshi, 23. "I didn't want to miss it."

Like these two, who came by themselves because their boyfriends wouldn't dare, women seem to have less of a problem than men in dealing with the exhibit.

Takayuki Yoshida, 19, whose design school took him here to study human anatomy, said, "I don't know what I'm doing here. I feel sick."

[70 percent of those attending the exhibit are women].

Sanno University psychology professor Biten Yasumoto said the exhibit's popularity with women can be explained by the fact that they are more conscious about their bodies, both due to social expectations for them to keep up their looks and for their role as the gender that bears children.
(Note: the most distasteful thing in this article, in my opinion, is its capitulation to the prudish use of "gender" when it means "sex." On this one, I'm with Justice Scalia, who has ridiculed this usage in dissenting opinions.).

So: any other theories on why women like poking their fingers into the organs of the dead more than we men do?

posted by Arnold P. California at 7:36 PM




Merry Christmas from the Department of Labor

First, DOL decided to change existing law and rule millions of workers ineligible for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Then, when even this Congress balked, the Bush administration offered to let the lowest-income workers stay covered under FLSA as a compromise. Now, DOL is helpfully advising employers how to avoid paying overtime to the low-income workers anyway.

One of the suggestions: lower poor workers' hourly pay, so that when they work overtime and get paid for it, their total pay will be the same as if they were still receiving their current hourly rate and not getting any overtime--i.e., the same result the administration wanted to begin with and then agreed to give up as a "compromise."
The department says it is merely listing well-known choices available to employers, even under current law.

"We're not saying anybody should do any of this," said Labor Department spokesman Ed Frank.

Employers' options include:

-- Making a "payroll adjustment" that results "in virtually no, or only a minimal increase in labor costs," the department said. Workers' annual pay would be converted to an hourly rate and cut, with overtime added in to equal the former salary.

Essentially, employees would be working more hours for the same pay.
The Clear Skies and Healthy Forests Award for Leaving No Newspeak Behind Award goes to:
The department does not view the "payroll adjustment" option as a pay cut. Rather, it allows the employer to "maintain the pay at the current level" with the new overtime requirements, said the Labor Department's Wage and Hour Division administrator, Tammy McCutchen, an architect of the plan.
Phew. I'm sure that will make the $18,000-a-year crowd feel much better when they're forced to work 50-hour weeks.

Then again, given the work ethic of McCutchen's boss, she's probably right to conclude that there's not a lot of concern in this administration for that particular constituency.

posted by Arnold P. California at 7:26 PM




An Anti-Bush Ad Fest

MoveOn.org is sponsoring a contest for amateurs to see who can produce the most compelling 30-second television ad attacking or challenging President Bush's record. The group is now down to 15 finalists -- you can view each of these ads by clicking here. Enjoy.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 3:01 PM




In Case You Missed It

Last night's "60 Minutes" did a good piece on Turkmenistan and its cultish leader

He's not only a brutal dictator, but a dictator who runs his country like it's his own private Disney World. That country, Turkmenistan, is a former Soviet republic sitting strategically between Iran and Afghanistan. And the man who runs it is Saparmurat Niyazov.

He’s known by his citizens, and by decree, as "Serdar Turkmenbashi" - which means "Great Leader of all Turkmen."

Human Rights Watch reports

The government of Turkmenistan is one of the most repressive in the world. Saparmurat Niazov is president for life. The government tolerates no opposition and crushes critical thinking. Since its independence from the Soviet Union, there has not been a single nationwide election that could be considered free or fair. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe declined to send even a scaled-down mission to monitor the 2000 parliamentary elections in Turkmenistan, so certain was it that they were an empty exercise.

Turkmen opposition figures were either driven into exile in the early 1990s or imprisoned. Most were released, and after the awful prison experience and constant surveillance afterward do not dare speak out again. No independent human rights organizations can operate in Turkmenistan. There is no free media: the government subjects all newspaper outlets to prepublication censorship, has banned most Russian-language media, and has introduced measures to limit access to the Internet.

In the name of building the Turkmen nation, the government has also banned opera, ballet, circus, the philharmonic orchestra, and non-Turkmen cultural associations. It has also closed the Academy of Sciences. Russian orthodoxy and government-approved Sunni Islam are the only religions that may operate houses of worship. Followers of other faiths have faced criminal prosecution, police beatings, deportation, and in some cases demolition of their houses of worship.

But rest assured, this has not stopped Donald Rumsfeld from visiting and personally thanking Turkmenbashi for his support in the War on Terror (and, more importantly, laying the groundwork for gaining access to Turkmenistan's massive natural gas reserves.)

Back in the ‘90s, an American oil company, Unocal, hired heavy-hitters like Henry Kissinger to tap into Turkmenistan's huge natural gas reserves via a proposed pipeline through Afghanistan. That deal fell through because of the Taliban. But today, Donald Rumsfeld is another heavy-hitter who's lobbying for Turkmenbashi's help. Rumsfeld made a quiet visit here last year to urge the Turkmen dictator to help with the on-going battle against the Taliban next door.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 12:32 PM




Nice Work If You Can Get It

Oh to be an op/ed writer in a world of lazy journalism.

Recently, I've read several op/eds all making the same bold rhetorical point--that Howard Dean is the new George McGovern. Here's a sampling:

In the last week, the Wall Street Journal has offered up not one, not two, but three such pieces. Political strumpet Dick Morris wrote:
All this augers well for the administration's '04 fortunes. If they can continue economic expansion and begin to bring troops home from Iraq, the 2003-4 cycle may come to resemble the 1971-72 Nixon experience. In 1971, George McGovern, steamrolling his way to the Democratic nomination seemed unstoppable. Impelled by frustration with Vietnam and catalyzed by Nixon's escalation of the conflict, he seemed to have the issue to bring the president down. But, by '72, troops were on their way home and Henry Kissinger was announcing that "Peace is at hand."

Club for Growth's Stephen Moore concurred [subscription required]:
[W]e maintain that Mr. Dean's economic agenda is reminiscent of such unforgettable recent Democratic presidential failures as George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. We're willing to admit that this may be a bit unfair. In fact, Messrs. McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis might have reason to complain, because none of them proposed economic policies that would tilt the Democratic Party as far to the left as Mr. Dean has.

And in today's WSJ, the GOP's favorite Democrat, Zell Miller writes: "Like George McGovern in '72, Howard Dean has tapped into that anger. I think regrettably so, not only for the country but also for the party."

Not to be outdone, Fox News' version of a liberal, Mort Kondracke just wrote a piece for Roll Call entitled [subscription required] "Dean Is McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis — A Trifecta of Losers."

And, two recent Washington Post columns--one by Lawrence Kaplan and another by George Will, make pretty much the same point.

How is it that pundits who peddle borrowed, months-old conventional wisdom can still manage find newspapers willing to print their pieces? [This is not a rhetorical question. I'd love to get paid to do what they do.] Is it too much to expect writers at major news outlets to stir up the pot with the occasional smattering of unconventional wisdom? [Okay, this is a rhetorical question.] Just for the sake of variety, how about comparing Dean to Adlai Stevenson or Grover Cleveland? Or, better yet, why carefully analyze--and, when appropriate, criticize--Dean's record rather than making specious comparisons?

For more on this, check out Tom Tomorrow's recent jab at the chattering class.

posted by Noam Alaska at 12:20 PM




God Has Been One Busy Dude Lately

As Eugene just mentioned, ultra-conservative televangelist Pat Robertson got the scoop straight from God that President Bush will win another term in "a blowout election ..."

Robertson is constantly getting instructions straight from heaven so, in one sense, this is no major news. But one set of Robertson's remarks stood out. In the Associated Press story, Robertson had this to say about President Bush:
"The Lord has just blessed him. I mean, he could make terrible mistakes and come out of it. It doesn't make any difference what [President Bush] does, good or bad, God picks him up because he's a man of prayer and God's blessing him."
Wait a minute. It "doesn't make any difference" whether Bush does "good or bad" things? Is Pat trying to tell us that God will guarantee Bush's political success even if the president turns North Dakota into one large internment camp? That's a strange twist on Christian doctrine.

Perhaps this news item helps to explain why the almighty has been too busy to relieve the post-earthquake miseries that persist in Iran, where the death toll is close to 30,000.

Clearly, the Lord has been preoccupied by other, more pressing events. For starters, there was the lengthy conversation that Robertson had with him during the final days of 2003. Even before that tete-a-tete with Rev. Pat, God devoted much of the past few months to helping certain sports teams win their games.

For example, Ohio State University football player Will Allen said in November that the team's then-No. 4 national ranking was "planned that way" and that "God has been on our side." (Apparently, God was napping when Ohio State was decisively beaten a few days later by Michigan.) And, upon winning Sunday night's college football championship game, Louisiana State quarterback Matt Mauck declared, "All I know is the powers that be selected us to be in this game."

As sports fans know, the Trojans of the University of Southern California (USC) are also laying claim to college football's No. 1 ranking. And now USC has another, more interesting argument for why it deserves the title of national champion. Unlike Ohio State and Louisiana State, USC had to play football without divine intervention on its side.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:07 PM




Predestination

From the USA Today

Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson said Friday he believes God has told him President Bush will be re-elected in a "blowout" in November.

"I think George Bush is going to win in a walk," Robertson said on his 700 Club program on the Virginia Beach-based Christian Broadcasting Network, which he founded. "I really believe I'm hearing from the Lord it's going to be like a blowout election in 2004. It's shaping up that way."

Robertson told viewers he spent several days in prayer at the end of 2003.

Since the Dems obviously have no chance, I wonder if I can get my money back from Howard Dean.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:54 AM




How Many Vacation Days Do You Get?

Via Naw we get this paragraph from an article in Friday's Washington Post

Mark Knoller of CBS News, scrupulous keeper of records of presidential activity, reports that this visit is Bush's 29th to his Texas ranch as president, so he has stopped at the ranch on all but three of his 32 presidential trips to Texas. Knoller reports that Bush has spent all or part of 214 days at his ranch. Since New Year's Day was Day 1,077 of the Bush presidency, he has been in Crawford for one-fifth of the days in his term. He is scheduled to return to Washington on Saturday.

Bush has been in office for three years and has spent over 30 weeks at the ranch? That amounts to 10 weeks of vacation a year, not including the time he has spent at Camp David or vacationing elsewhere.

It is good work if you can get it.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:26 AM




Some of My Best Friends Are Southerners

I don't know much about the South, but if I lived there, I'd probably think that Sen. Kerry's response during last night's debate was extremely patronizing and condescending

NORRIS: Senator Kerry, if I have my history right, no Democratic president has carried a majority of white voters since the 1960s. I believe the last to do so was Lyndon Johnson.

Senator, how do you plan to broaden the base and reach out to those voters, particularly Southern white voters who no longer even consider Democratic candidates?

And what can you point to in your political experience to suggest that you will have success in this task?

KERRY: I can point to what is happening in South Carolina right now and in other parts of the South, where people are supporting me because I represent leadership, tested experience that has the ability to make America safer in a very dangerous time.

I am a veteran. I've fought in a war. They particularly respect service to country in the South.

I also have fought as a law enforcement officer. I led the fight to put 100,000 cops on the streets of America.

I'm going to talk mainstream American common sense to our country.

And there are incredible numbers of people in the South who are losing education, losing health care, losing their jobs, because they are being drawn away by slogans, rather than real choices.

And in the end, if I'm the nominee, I could always pick a running mate from the South, and we'll do just fine.

So Kerry's plan for reaching out to these voters is to patronize them and insinuate that they are stupid before just choosing some southern running mate to placate them?

Good luck with that.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:51 AM




Laying the Foundation

We are all aware of the role that the World's Biggest Asshole played in strong-arming the Texas legislature into redistricting so as to ensure perpetual Republican representation.

But now questions are being raised about how the Republicans managed to gain control over the legislature in the first place

Authorities are conducting a criminal investigation into whether corporate money, including hundreds of thousands of dollars linked to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, improperly financed the Republican Party's takeover of the Texas Capitol.

The probe is focused on several political and fund-raising organizations run by Republican activists, investigators said. One organization, the political-action committee Texans for a Republican Majority, has direct ties to DeLay, a Texas Republican and one of Washington's most powerful politicians.

At issue is whether the organizations improperly used corporate contributions to help finance the campaigns of more than 20 GOP candidates for the Texas House in 2002, according to documents and interviews with prosecutors and government investigators.

[edit]

Texas law bans corporations from contributing money to candidates for office. Corporations are allowed to fund many ancillary costs of a political campaign, such as office rental or telephone lines, and in many cases are allowed to educate voters through advertisements and other programs, provided they do not specifically advocate a candidate's defeat.

Texans for a Republican Majority is an offshoot of DeLay's Americans for a Republican Majority, created in 1994 to elect conservatives to public office. The Texas group was created in 2001, with the 2002 elections in mind, using seed money from Americans for a Republican Majority.

Investigators said they suspect that the Texas group spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on telephone banks and other initiatives during the election — projects, they said, that went beyond the administrative costs that corporations are allowed to fund in Texas elections. The money, in effect, represented a direct contribution to candidates, they argue.

Sadly, DeLay has not yet been personally accused of any campaign-finance violations but that is no reason to lose hope.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:25 AM




The Fog of War

Most Americans know that the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 brought the world close to nuclear conflict. But how close? Robert McNamara, who was Kennedy's secretary of defense, wants Americans to know that nuclear war was even much closer than they realized then. It's one of many revelations and keen observations in Sony Pictures' "The Fog of War" -- a bio-documentary film that I heartily recommend to anyone who thinks or cares about the daunting choices that presidents, military leaders and diplomats face in modern times.

McNamara's reflections on the Cuban Missile Crisis, the progressive escalation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and other events of decades gone by are insightful and edifying. Perhaps to his credit, McNamara resists the temptation to turn this into an all-too-easy mea culpa. "The Fog of War" filmmaker Errol Morris was recently interviewed about the movie by NPR.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 10:24 AM




Bradley For Dean?

From the Washington Post

Former Sen. Bill Bradley, who lost the Democratic nomination for president to Al Gore in 2000, is expected to endorse front-runner Howard Dean, party officials said Monday.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:51 AM




OOPS! I got drunk and got married...

I'm not usually one to comment on the antics of pop culture icons, but when my morning news coverage included the accidental weekend nuptials of Britney Spears my first thoughts were about the ongoing marriage rights debate. But thankfully ya'll are spared my lame tirade because social conservative Chuck Muth has already made my point for me.

Thanks Chuck! You're a peach!

posted by Zoe Kentucky at 9:35 AM



Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com