|
|
|
Demagoguery |
|
|
|
"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."
Franklin D. Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, April 24, 2004 |
|
|
|
Grow Up Already
Republicans are doing a lot of stuff we liberals should find outrageous. This isn't one of them.Democrats are furious about a statement by Republicans saying that comparing one of their candidates to presidential candidate John Kerry would be worse than comparing someone to the Ku Klux Klan.
The dispute started when The New York Times inadvertently published a photo of Republican Senate candidate Pete Coors above a story about a KKK member who murdered a black sharecropper. The Times published a correction Saturday.
Cinamon Watson, spokeswoman for Coors, said the error was "so outrageous it's kind of funny. It could have been worse. Pete could have been identified as John Kerry.''
Chris Gates, chairman of the Colorado Democratic Party, demanded an apology. He said Democrats are "out there campaigning positively on the issues, and the Republicans can't help but resort to the lowest level of insult and name-calling.'' The only objectionable things here are that Ms. Watson's parents named her after a spice (no, not Victoria Beckham; the other kind), and that they didn't know how to spell it properly.
This is a joke, people, and kind of a self-directed one at that; it's saying "we're so anti-Kerry that we don't even realize that he's not as bad as the KKK."
Get a grip.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 6:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, April 23, 2004 |
|
|
|
French for Funny
The washing instructions tag for a Seattle fashion designer includes the following text:
Part of the French instructions translated into English say: "We are sorry that our president is an idiot. We didn't vote for him."
The designer claims that the origin of the translated text are unknown and that someone in his company added the text without his knowledge. "I'm going with the idea that it's a joke about me, the president of the company," Tom Bihn says, but "clearly when you use the word 'idiot' and 'president' in the same sentence people jump to other conclusions."
Because of the label his designer bags have been selling really well. Now he's even selling t-shirts with the "treason tag" on the front. I might have to go pick up one myself-- he's donating the profits of the shirt to a veteran's charity.
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 4:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Conservatives?
Recently, many so-called "fiscal conservatives" have gotten their knickers in a twist over suggested pay-as-you-go (paygo) rules being considered on Capitol Hill. There are two proposed sets of rules: one would, for the sake of fiscal responsibility, require that any increases in entitlement spending or decreases in taxes be offset by other spending cuts or tax increases. The other would impose this discipline on spending, but not tax cuts.
Most right-wing groups like the idea of restricting spending. However, they're less eager to exhibit discipline on tax cuts, fearing that this would doom their plans to make Bush's tax cuts permanent. The Heritage Foundation tsk-tsks the broader paygo rules, arguing that they would result in "massive tax increases." They think a better idea would be to adopt paygo rules that only deal with spending or, better yet, put spending caps on entitlement programs:
Extending spending caps to mandatory spending would address the real problem [emphasis added]– the 7 percent annual growth rate in current entitlement programs – by forcing lawmakers to put all mandatory spending on the table and set priorities.
A story from the Washington Post proves that the "tax cuts good, spending bad" viewpoint espoused by so many wingers is out of touch with reality:
Congress's task seemed simple enough: Repeal an illegal $5 billion-a-year export subsidy and replace it with some modest tax breaks to ease the pain on U.S. exporters.
But out of that imperative has emerged one of the most complex, special-interest-riddled corporate tax bills in years, lawmakers, Senate aides and tax lobbyists say. The 930-page epic is packed with $170 billion in tax cuts aimed at cruise-ship operators, foreign dog-race gamblers, NASCAR track owners, bow-and-arrow makers and Oldsmobile dealers, to name a few. There is even a $94 million break for a single hotel in Sioux City, Iowa.
Even one of the tax lobbyists involved in drafting it conceded the bill "has risen to a new level of sleaze."
"I said a few months ago, any lobbyist worth his salt has something in this bill," said the lobbyist, who would only speak candidly on condition of anonymity. "Now you see what I'm talking about."
posted by
Noam Alaska at 3:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consultation After the Fact
David Sirota has an article in the American Prospect on Bush's transfer of money appropriated for operations in Afghanistan to planning for war in Iraq.
In my view, this raises a key issue As the post-9-11 emergency spending bill mandates, the president is required to "consult with the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Committees on Appropriations prior to the transfer" of any funds. But that never happened, according to Senator Robert Byrd, who as chairman of the Appropriations Committee at the time would have been informed. He said "the White House provided no consultations" about moving funds into Iraq operations. While the administration submitted reports to Congress, it used deliberately vague language, saying only that it was increasing "situational awareness" and "worldwide posture" -- but never mentioning Iraq.
The August 2002 spending bill is the same: while it afforded the administration wide latitude, it required the president to consult with Congress and give 15 days’ notice before moving any money. But as one top Democrat reported, "there was no consultation" -- and there is no evidence that Congress was notified.
"Consult" is defined as "to ask the advice or opinion." But McClellan and others seem to think no laws were broken because "Congress was kept fully informed of all expenditures."
"Keeping Congress informed" and "consulting" are two different things. In fact, "keeping Congress informed" is the exact opposite of "consulting" in that it involves merely telling them what you are doing, most likely after the decision has been made or implemented. But the legislation specifically requires that the administration "consult with the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Committees on Appropriations prior to the transfer."
The administration clearly did not "consult" anyone at all about moving this money - and they certainly didn't do so "prior" to moving it.
That seems to be a pretty clear violation of the law if you believe that words like "consult" and "prior" mean "discuss before doing."
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 1:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Creative Opportunity?
Fark wants you to photoshop this NRA attendee. Go here to see the entries.
posted by
Helena Montana at 12:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read This
Zoe posted on a crackpot reaction to the March for Women's Lives. On the subject of the march itself, Molly Ivins wrote a passionate and articulate call to arms that is a must-read. So go read it.
Among many other observations, Ivins makes a point that's been made before but that bears repeating; in this case, the context is the Bush Administration's withholding the $34 million that Congress appropriates annually for the UN Population Fund.According to the Population Fund, the loss of $34 million from the United States led to two million more unwanted pregnancies, 800,000 induced abortions, 4,700 maternal deaths and 77,000 deaths of infants and children. Bush is expected to withhold the $34 million appropriated by Congress for the coming year as well.
Anti-choice policies threaten the lives of women around the world. Kofi Annan said, "HIV infection and AIDS are spreading dramatically and disproportionately among women. Today, AIDS has a woman's face." The first official action George W. Bush took as president was to reinstate the global gag rule of the Reagan years -- no clinic that so much as mentions abortion, even to women who will die without it, can receive U.S. aid. Between 1972 and 1989, Planned Parenthood used USAID financial assistance to provide 330 million cycles of birth control pills, 1.3 million condoms, 14 million IUDs and provided $92 million in financial assistance to over 439 family planning agencies around the world. The gag rule cut all funding to Planned Parenthood. Of course more abortions were the result. Bush and his cronies don't give a damn about the women and (post-natal) children who die because of their policies, let alone the misery inflicted on millions who aren't killed, so let's just put all that aside. The bottom line is that American policy causes an increase in the number of abortions in the Third World. True, most of these instances involve fetuses who wouldn't have been conceived in the first place but for those policies, so if you take the view that contraception is as sinful as abortion, maybe you don't mind so much. But I don't think that's where most pro-life Americans are on this issue; condoms just aren't as bad as abortion to most folks (and I'll say the same on the pro-choice side: many people have moral concerns about abortion--they just don't think the government should be making the call--but few see a serious moral issue with contraception).
posted by
Arnold P. California at 12:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Truly Heroic Sacrifice
From the AP Former U.S. professional football star Pat Tillman, who gave up a $3.6 million sports contract to join the military's elite special forces, has been killed in a firefight in Afghanistan, a U.S. official said on Friday.
The official, who asked not to be identified, said Tillman was killed on Thursday. The 27-year-old soldier abruptly quit his National Football League career following the 2002 season and joined the Army a year after the attacks on America.
Enlisting with his brother Kevin in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, Tillman turned down a $3.6 million contract from the Arizona Cardinals to become an Army Ranger for an annual salary of $18,000.
Tillman's death is a tragedy, as are the deaths of every soldier killed in the line of duty.
Tillman and every other soldier deserve our respect and gratitude for their service and sacrifice.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:42 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russ Feingold: Un-American Coward
At least that is how his Republican opponents see him Four Republicans who hope to challenge U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold in November had harsh words Thursday for the two-term incumbent's lonely vote against the Patriot Act, with one calling the action "un-American" and another calling it "cowardly."
[edit]
"I believe that Russ Feingold's vote was just terrible. It was really un-American is what it was," said Darrow, who had donated money to Feingold after the 2001 vote.
Darrow said afterward that he did not intend to question Feingold's patriotism, only the "patriotism of that vote."
Lorge, meanwhile, said that Feingold "cast a cowardly vote against the Patriot Act. He was the only one."
Lorge is Robert Gerald Lorge and his name is familiar to me only because his brother, Bill, is a perennial Wisconsin "also-ran" whose sole qualification for office is his self-proclaimed resemblance to Elvis.
How being the only one in the Senate willing to vote against the Patriot Act makes Feingold a "coward" is beyond me. Maybe Lorge's campaign slogan ought to be "When Everybody is Jumping off the Bridge, I say 'Don't be a Coward!'"
Which brings up this point: Lorge is so desperate for support that he is allowing people to sponsor a "Vote Robert Lorge"' billboard and if you are willing to pay for it, you get to decide what it says. Didn't Lorge learn any lessons from the Sloganator?
Give Feingold some money, if you are so inclined.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know you're doing something right when...
you get a reaction like this one. Newsmax columnists have this to say about the March for Women's Lives: "The feminist movement for independence is a scourge on our culture. Whatever good they think they’ve accomplished for women’s “rights” has been overshadowed by skyrocketing out-of-wedlock births, masses of single mothers on welfare, and generations of fatherless children across our country. But this weekend, rabid feminists will come together to proclaim their victories and demand even more political power under the guise of “women’s health...the March for Women’s Lives is really a selfish, destructive, pro-death rally for their ideal of female superiority...These rabid feminists’ lifelong goal is to prove life is possible, in fact better, without men." Hmmm. Perhaps they'd have less to fear from feminists or feminism if they weren't such misogynistic pigs, eh?
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 11:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And He Didn't Even Need Cheney By His Side
Bush managed to withstand the relentless questioning of Michael Kelly's 8-year old son - from the New York Post The rare one-on-one interview with President Bush came about when Tom's mom, Madelyn "Max" Kelly, made arrangements to personally deliver a copy of Michael Kelly's posthumously published book, "Things Worth Fighting For," after the president requested it.
Tom was invited along - but said he'd come only if he had the opportunity to interview the big man himself.
[edit]
Asked what was the least and most favorite about being president, Bush replied, "Let's see. My most favorite part about being president is making decisions that make the world more free and more peaceful. My least favorite part of the presidency is that I can't just walk out the front door of where I live and go for a walk by myself."
Tom Kelly ought to feel very proud; he received the same superficial answers Bush gives to the real questions from the real press.
Or maybe the press ought to feel insulted.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Nuremburg Defense
I can hardly believe this one. A teacher at a Newton County school has resigned after officials say she admitted she told two students to throw a 14-year-old girl from a classroom window.
[snip]
The two boys later told principal Kenneth Daniels that they threw the girl out the window because they did not want to be written up for disobeying a teacher. Jawohl.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 10:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Desperate People, Desperate Measures
The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy machine is running really hard these days. In fact, it seems to be running so hard against Kerry that they're just throwing everything and anything they can think of at him. So far, Kerry is a bad Catholic, a flip-flopper, a liar, has too many purple hearts, is a snob, a jerk, is fundamentally unlikeable, speaks French, is an opportunist, and is a "pampered prince" who travels in a SUV.
But you know they're feeling pretty desperate when they resort to calling Kerry a commie. Aldrich Urges Kerry to Release FBI Files
FBI whistle-blower, best-selling author and NewsMax columnist Gary Aldrich says it's not enough for Sen. John Kerry to say he'll release his military and medical files because "he continues to withhold some documentation from public viewing."
"These reports include evaluations by his Navy commanding officers, as well as medical records resulting in his first Purple Heart. Kerry has yet to promise the release of his FBI files," The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty, of which Aldrich is president, stated today. "These FBI files are the most important, as they outline Kerry’s alliance to North Vietnamese Communists during the Vietnam War."
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 10:41 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nader's Matching Funds
When I first saw this article I simply could not understand how this could be Campaign spokesman Kevin Zeese said Nader was able to make the request for matching funds two months earlier than he did in 2000, when he announced his candidacy at about the same time. Nader had raised only $198,000 by this time four years ago.
I know Nader has a lot of supporters, but how, after 3 years of Bush, he could raise three-times more money than he did at this point in 2000 was bewildering.
But now I think I understand - he's getting it from Republicans Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader is receiving a little help from his friends - and from George W. Bush's friends.
Nearly 10 percent of contributors who have given Nader at least $250 have a history of supporting the Republican president, national GOP candidates or the party, according to computer-assisted review of financial records.
Among the new crop of Nader donors: actor and former Nixon speechwriter Ben Stein, Florida frozen-food magnate Jeno Paulucci and Pennsylvania oil-company executive Terrence Jacobs. All have strong ties to the GOP.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 9:52 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't Go Into Dark Garages at Night, Fellow Demagogues
posted by
Arnold P. California at 9:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pork
You'd think that by now I would have resigned myself to simply accepting this sort of thing, but I can't and every time I see one of these articles, I get even more pissed off House lawmakers recently decided US taxpayers should send $500,000 to Montezuma, Ga., in a transportation bill. It's not to upgrade an interstate highway but to improve the sidewalk, lighting, and landscaping between Cherry and Hampton Streets.
Hey, it's only half a million dollars, but that is one small reason why the bill is now $19 billion bigger than the president's $256 billion request.
Then there's a new tax bill, launched when Congress wanted to fix a $5 billion-a-year export subsidy that turned out to be illegal under global trade rules. Now, measures tacked on outside the normal budget process have expanded the bill's girth to $170 billion in tax breaks:
• $519 million for makers of small jets.
• $8 million for makers of arrows. Yes, as in Robin Hood.
• $25 million for foreigners who gamble at US horse and dog races.
[edit]
Public interest groups who plunge into the minutiae of spending or tax bills to find earmarks say it's often difficult to recognize when a lawmaker has written a special provision into a bill. Special projects are those that bypass normal budgetary processes: They haven't been requested by the president or an authorizing committee or vetted in congressional hearings. They usually serve only a local or special interest. Many appear in the text of a bill just hours before lawmakers vote.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 9:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Love of God
What in the hell is wrong with Americans (or at least 57% of them)? A new poll shows that 57 percent of Americans continue to believe that Saddam Hussein gave "substantial support" to al-Qaida terrorists before the war with Iraq, despite a lack of evidence of that relationship.
Also, 45 percent of Americans have the impression that "clear evidence" was found that Iraq worked closely with Osama bin Laden's network, and a majority believe that before the war Iraq either had weapons of mass destruction (38 percent) or a major program for developing them (22 percent).
There's no known evidence to date that these statements are true.
You can see the actual report here. (PDF file) You really have to take a look at it in order to see just how stupid some people are (and, not coincidentally, most of those people seem to be planning on voting for Bush.)
Link via Political Animal
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 8:51 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, April 22, 2004 |
|
|
|
Note to Self: Don't Get Sick in Michigan
The Michigan House has passed a bill that aims to permit medical professionals to refuse to treat gay or lesbian people. Doctors or other health care providers could not be disciplined or sued if they refuse to treat gay patients under legislation passed Wednesday by the Michigan House. The bill allows health care workers to refuse service to anyone on moral, ethical or religious grounds.
The Republican dominated House passed the measure as dozens of Catholics looked on from the gallery. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol.
The bills now go the Senate, which also is controlled by Republicans.
The Conscientious Objector Policy Act would allow health care providers to assert their objection within 24 hours of when they receive notice of a patient or procedure with which they don't agree. However, it would prohibit emergency treatment to be refused. I have an idea for how the Michigan Board of Medicine should respond-- any doctor or medical professional who invokes this act should have their license and/or certification immediately revoked and be banned from practicing medicine in the state of Michigan. It is clear evidence that the person should not be in medicine and does not understand the basic principles of practicing medicine-- the caring for, treatment and healing of others.
Good thing I'm not in Michigan right now because this story is making me feel quite ill.
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 5:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contempt
There are three cases challenging the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, and the one in New York is moving a bit more slowly than the other two. This may account for what seems to be relatively minimal coverage of the New York judge's ruling that a hospital must turn over records of late-term abortions so that the government can try to establish that the procedures criminalized by the statute are never necessary to a woman's health. A contrary ruling in one of the other cases got more press.
Anyway, if you do see any coverage, don't be shocked that the hospital has been found in contempt of court. That's a procedural detail of federal-court practice. The hospital isn't party to the lawsuit. The only way for it to appeal the judge's order to produce the records is to refuse to do so and be found in contempt; then, it can appeal the contempt finding. The trial judge understands this and will not punish the hospital for its refusal to produce the records. Even if the appeals court affirms the contempt order, I suspect the hospital will simply have to turn over the records without any further sanction.
By the way, the hospital in question is where the California children were born. Unless there's a big screw-up, Mrs. California's records won't be turned over, because we're a Jerry Falwell family: married monogamous heterosexual couple with three in-wedlock kids and no abortions. But, frankly, I trust the medical judgment of Mrs. California's excellent OB-GYN a lot more than that of Congress, and I don't doubt that I'd trust the other OB-GYNs on staff and with privileges at one of New York's leading teaching hospitals more than even transplant surgeon and hospital tycoon Bill Frist on this issue.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 4:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Two-fer
This extremely funny piece from Humor is Dead manages to lacerate the French and the Department of Homeland Security at the same time, so it's guarnteed larfs for your friends everywhere along the political spectrum. And while you're there, check out the rest of the site if you're into very bitter, acid-laced lefty satire mixed in with fringe political commentary (in other words: Al Franken and other Democratic Party entertainers need not apply).
posted by
Arnold P. California at 3:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Worse Than Watergate
Check out this Kos post on John O'Neill, the man the Republicans have trotted out to attack Kerry's war record. (Link via John Moltz)
While we're on the subject, I came across this interesting passage from "The Wars of Watergate" regarding the Nixon administration's strategy for dealing with Sen. Sam Ervin's Watergate investigation While adopting a public posture of cooperation with the Select Committee, presidential staff would make every effort to restrain the investigation and "make it as difficult as possible to get information and witnesses."
That sounds familiar.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 2:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hannity Hypocrisy Alert
I know that keeping track of all of Sean Hannity's hypocritical remarks would be a full-time job (requiring a very high salary and a heck of a health plan), but there are times when you have to call him on the carpet.
On last night's edition (or should I say episode? it is, after all, an entertainment show, not a news show) of HANNITY and colmes, Sean attacked someone for disparaging an entire group of people and then, without skipping a beat, went on to disparage an entire group of people. Here's the exchange:
[Democratic strategist Dave] POLLAK: All -- the Saudi government are the ones who are funding these things that generate the terrorists. And if you look...
HANNITY: Dave -- Dave, I'd be very careful where you're going here. You do not want to disparage an entire country or a group of people the way you are. And I'd be very careful where you're going.
POLLAK: I'm not disparaging anyone. I'm only suggesting that if there are secret deals this is something that you of all people should try to figure out.
HANNITY: Let me go to Randy.
Randy, one of the things, problem I have with the Democrats is -- I call them black helicopter Democrats.
RANDY TATE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Right.
HANNITY: You've got Howard Dean accusing the president of knowing about 9/11 ahead of time. You've got Dennis Kucinich accusing the president of assassinating civilians.
Ted Kennedy saying that George Bush thinks he's been out there, Ted Kennedy and all of his comments that he's been making about the president.
What is -- I think they're unraveling because they're just doing anything to get their power back.
posted by
Noam Alaska at 12:49 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing Could Make This Any Funnier Than It Already Is*
Feminists are on the run, says Phyllis Schlafly According to a new Australian-Chinese study published in the International Journal of Cancer, moderate exercise such as housework decreases the risk of ovarian cancer in women. The more and the harder the housework the housewife does, the more she benefits.
The same week, attendees at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research in Orlando were told that a study at Women's Hospital in Boston showed that modest amounts of exercise can substantially improve women's chances of surviving breast cancer and help them to live longer. The doctor who presented the findings recommended the exercise of walking (but neglected to suggest walking behind a vacuum cleaner).
I can't even think of anything to say about this because I can't stop laughing.
Anyway, check out this related article Head researcher Colin Binns from Perth's Curtin University on Australia's west coast said the two-year study of 900 Chinese women found the risk of ovarian cancer declined with increasing physical activity. Housework was on the list.
"If you are only doing the housework 20 minutes a week ... it does not really count, but if you are doing three to four hours a day, this is fairly vigorous exercise and increases protection from ovarian cancer," Binns told Reuters.
Who is doing 3 to 4 hours of vigorous housework every day? Is there even 3 to 4 hours worth of housework to do every day?
And finally, you have to wonder why Schlafly thinks this is good news, especially considering that she has chosen to dedicate her own life to being a lawyer, author and founder and president of the Eagle Forum rather than a housewife.
* I think I may have stolen this line from Mr. Poon.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 12:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What the Hell is Wrong with North Korea?
From Reuters Up to 3,000 people were killed or injured when two trains loaded with fuel collided and exploded at a North Korean station Thursday, hours after leader Kim Jong-il had passed through, South Korea's YTN television said.
[edit]
North Korea appears to have cut international telephone lines to the area to prevent information about the explosion getting out, Yonhap added. The North appears to have declared a type of emergency in the area.
[edit]
Residents in Pyongyang said by telephone there was nothing unusual in the capital. North Korean television was broadcasting military songs and music -- standard evening fare.
On a related note, a German physician who worked in North Korea for two years and had been awarded a "Friendship Medal" and given his own car and a VIP passport that allowed him to travel freely through the country has a book coming out next month called "Inside North Korea."
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 12:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You Have Two Options: Death or Reprimand
Gotta love those "Big Tent" Republicans. From the Denver Post "The Republican Party's central committee in northern New Mexico's Sandoval County, saying county Clerk Victoria Dunlap 'has brought disgrace to the party,' voted to censure her for issuing same-sex marriage licenses.
'Other than assassination, all we can do is censure her,' said committee chairman Richard Gibbs."
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:11 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And They Laughed and Laughed
Bush spoke to a gathering of newspaper editors, publishers and executives and joked about his penchant for not answering questions The whole issue of questions from the audience at the Associated Press annual luncheon was a running joke for the president during his talk. He opened his speech by saying, "I kind of like ducking questions," and said he would be "glad to duck any questions like my mother once told me to do" following his remarks.
In the end he only took three questions, from those submitted in advance by AP members, and read by Burl Osborne, the AP chairman. After replying to one question he apologized for "the long answer, but at least I answered it."
I fail to see the humor. Next thing you know, Bush will be joking about sending thousands of people off on a wild goose chase and getting a bunch of them killed.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:06 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What a Joke
At the insistence of the campaign designed to re-elect a man who didn't serve in Vietnam and might not even have fulfilled his duty in the Air National Guard, John Kerry has released his military records. And they make him look pretty good After days of being pressed by Republicans, Senator John Kerry on Wednesday released his military records, which showed uniformly positive evaluations from his commanders in Vietnam.
[edit]
The records depict many instances of bravery in the face of enemy fire and describe a young officer who is smart, articulate and decisive. For example, George M. Elliot, his commander in early 1969, wrote, "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed."
Of course, highlighting the glaring differences between Kerry's service and Bush's was not what the Republicans had in mind, so they absurdly tried to spin the issue thusly Terry Holt, a spokesman for President Bush's campaign, said the issue was never Mr. Kerry's military service but what he said was Mr. Kerry's hypocrisy in calling for full disclosure of various aspects of Mr. Bush's presidency while Mr. Kerry had not released his own military records or the tax returns of his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.
"What this reinforces is something very basic about John Kerry - that he only responds to political pressure," Mr. Holt said. "We're going to hold him accountable. But that doesn't mean that it's one of the main themes of the campaign."
For the record, Bush still has not released his complete military record. As for the allegation that Kerry only responds to political pressure - well, that is clearly a case of Freudian Projection.
Anyway, now that Kerry has released his records, it is nice to see the Washington Times serve its role as little more than a mouthpiece for the Republican Party. Here's it's lede The military records that Sen. John Kerry posted on his Web site yesterday raise new questions about the actions he took to earn several prestigious war medals and whether he deserved them.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 10:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Satan is Clinging to Our Sexual Organs
Ouch! Here's the full quote. Can you guess which right-wing emperor said it?"Satan is clinging to our sexual organs and pushes us to use them. Satan's work now is to try to get us to misuse the sexual organ. Westerners may think they have much to impress me with but I have gone beyond that. We must restore the fall and go beyond the misuse of the sexual organs. We are people of power, but it doesn't mean much. One woman claimed she had a relationship with [me]. It was false. I could have collected evidence, but what is important is to educate people about what is right and wrong." That's right. The one with the big fat messiah complex, Rev. Moon.
That gem, and many others are from a new-to-me blog by writer John Gorenfeld. If you have the least bit of interest in the wacky doings of the Unification Church, you should check him out. If you get a sense of de javu reading his stuff, as I did, it's probably because you've read his work in Salon. I'm delighted to find someone who covers Moon and his ilk in blog form, especially since he packages it in easily digestible nuggets of crazy. (Thanks Avedon Carol!)
posted by
Helena Montana at 10:09 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, April 21, 2004 |
|
|
|
Manuel Miranda: Lying Douchebag
Here is just a little excerpt from an article on a speech Miranda gave last night "Democrats and Republicans really function differently on this issue," Miranda said. "The relationship between Democrats and the special-interest groups that support them is really hand in glove. But Republicans do not have that same relationship. Their relationship with outside groups is really arm's length and full of mutual suspicion."
And here is just a little excerpt from a Wall Street Journal article on Boyden Gray and Ralph Neas (courtesy of the Committee for Justice) With control of the Senate then in Democratic hands, the Judiciary Committee rejected Judge Pickering's nomination in March 2002. That infuriated fellow Mississippian Sen. Trent Lott, then Senate minority leader. At a White House meeting, Mr. Lott warned President Bush that all this was a dress rehearsal for an eventual showdown over the Supreme Court, according to an individual familiar with the conversation. Republicans were outgunned, the senator said. Neither Mr. Lott nor the White House would comment.
Mr. Lott told veteran Republican lobbyist Ed Rogers Republicans needed a group to go "toe to toe with Ralph Neas," according to a person familiar with the situation. The two agreed on Mr. Gray, who, as White House counsel, had bested Mr. Neas during the emotional fight over the Thomas Supreme Court nomination in 1991.
After hearing from Mr. Rogers, Mr. Gray says, in July 2003 he formed the Committee for Justice, a three-person operation that so far has concentrated on shoring up Republican support for Bush nominees. The committee sometimes coordinates with another group on which Mr. Gray serves as co-chairman, Citizens for a Sound Economy, which usually lobbies on economic issues. The latter group had a 2002 budget of $8 million, but has since spun off part of its operations. The nomination work is only part-time duty for Mr. Gray, who doesn't take a salary from the committee. He is a Washington lawyer and lobbyist for clients such as Citigroup Inc.
Lacking Mr. Neas's troop strength, Mr. Gray works his Republican Party and Bush family connections. The first President Bush has hosted a fund-raiser; so has the current president's nephew. Mr. Gray, who says he has raised about $1 million, has discussed tactics with Karl Rove, the White House's top political strategist. He also meets monthly with Republican senators including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch.
And here is just another little excerpt, this one from the Pickle Report (I've filled in the blanks) When Mr. Lundell was asked how the Democratic documents were disclosed to the press, he identified Mr. Miranda as the likely source. Mr. Lundell stated that he met Mr. Miranda in the Senate Chef (an eatery in the Dirksen building) early in the week of November 17, 2003, shortly after the story broke. Mr. Lundell stated that he specifically asked Mr. Miranda if he had leaked the documents to the press and that Mr. Miranda said "No." Mr. Lundell told investigators that he then asked Mr. Miranda whether he gave them to Mr. Rushton who gave them to the press. Mr. Miranda's response, according to Mr. Lundell, was to nod his head affirmatively. Or how about this e-mail Miranda sent to Lundell Can I ask you to undertake a discreet mission. Mr. Rushton should get a complete relpcate [sic]of the Ame Ex binder. He needs to get up to speed with outr [sic] best info as he build [sic] relationships with the press.
"Arm's length" and "mutual suspicion" indeed.
Liar.
Douchebag.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 4:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grading Inflation
Today's Progress Report has a lot of good information regarding the Bush administration's revamped overtime rules which will still deny overtime pay to millions of Americans.
I thought this fact was pretty interesting Workers making less than $23,660 a year are automatically eligible for overtime in the new rules, compared with $22,100 in the first proposal. The current cap is $8,060.
The current $8,060 cap seems awfully low. And indeed it is because it was set in 1975 and not adjusted for inflation.
But since Bush and Congress are trying to address this problem, I am sure they'll correct that mistake this time around The salary figures are set and will not change with inflation. "That means that every year as wages rise, more and more people will lose the guarantee," Owens said.
Or maybe not. I guess this will just have to tide us over for another 29 years.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 2:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still Self-Righteous After All These Years
Ken Starr takes questions in the NYT magazine. Here are some of the questions, selectively quoted and reordered for my own amusement.And are you reading anything interesting now?
I am rereading Dickens's ''Bleak House.''
Do you feel your work as an independent counsel helped the country in any way or just added to cynicism about government?
I am so ill-equipped to say. What I do know is it was a very unhappy reminder that all persons are subject to the law and the legal process, no matter how lofty their station in life. I regret it for the country, but it needed to be done.
Do you believe that atheists go to hell?
I am not going to get into theology.
You're impeding my investigation. You won't answer anything, although you investigate everyone else.
Wait a second. Not everyone. Just one person. And I had a nice legal charter!
I find you unnecessarily secretive.
But I told you about ''Bleak House.'' Now don't forget to mention my book -- ''First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life.'' It's just out in paperback.
posted by
Helena Montana at 2:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money Talks
Apparently the GOP is mad that the odds in the political money game don't seem to stack in their favor anymore. Twenty-one of the largest Democratic-allied 527 groups — named after a section of the tax code — raised nearly $57 million in the first three months of this year, according to reports filed last week with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and sorted by fundraising watchdog groups such as PoliticalMoneyLine.com and the Center for Public Integrity.
Yesterday, at a closed-door meeting of trade associations hosted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on get-out-the-vote practices, Ken Mehlman, manager of the Bush-Cheney campaign, decried the impact of the soft-money groups.
“Thanks to 527s, we will be outspent by the Democrats,” said Mehlman, according to a participant who took notes of the meeting. “MoveOn.org is a huge threat and has hurt the president. Every action makes a difference.”
So far this year, the groups have spent close to $52 million, much of it on television ads and other campaign activities designed to affect the presidential race and other federal contests. At the beginning of April, the Kerry campaign announced it had raised $50 million during the first three months of the year.
Approximately $14 million of the $15 million raised by the Joint Victory Campaign, a joint fundraising committee for the Media Fund and Americans Coming Together (ACT), was disbursed to those to groups, according to Political MoneyLine.com, making their fundraising totals appear greater.
Nevertheless, the groups’ fundraising total for 2004 is likely to come close to matching the Bush-Cheney campaign.
An official with the president’s re-election campaign said it had raised a few million over $50 million during the first three months of the year. The campaign will disclose its Federal Election Commission (FEC) report for March today.
The 21 left-leaning groups surveyed matched in three months what they raised in all of 2003. It's even easier to understand the Republican outrage when you consider that the Bush campaign war chest is reported to have $88.6 million in the bank at the moment. (They've already spent $100 million.)
However, despite all of their whining, three of the top twelve 527s ever with the biggest bank accounts are none other than the Republican Governor's Association, College Republican National Committee, and the Bush-Cheney 2000, Inc-Recount Fund. Notice how these groups have "Republican" in their name.
Also, how should one tabulate the work and budget of FoxNews for BC04?
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 11:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm Just Guessing
But I think that Paul Wolfowitz is lying - to Congress Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz yesterday denied a report in a new book that the Pentagon in 2002 secretly diverted $700 million to a covert military construction program in Kuwait linked to a future war with Iraq without adequately informing Congress.
Wolfowitz, responding to questions by members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, took strong issue with an account of the Pentagon spending contained in "Plan of Attack," by Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward.
The book describes a $700 million plan, approved by President Bush, to use money that Congress had approved for the war in Afghanistan and the general war on terrorism to finance airfields and pipelines in Kuwait, setting the stage for a "giant invasion." Congress, Woodward wrote, "had no real knowledge or involvement."
In testimony yesterday, Wolfowitz said that the U.S. Central Command had prepared a $750 million contingency plan for Iraq by July 2002. He said that the Pentagon had earmarked $241 million of the total before Congress voted for an Iraq war resolution in October 2002. But the money, he said, went only "to strengthen our capabilities in the region," and "no funding was made available for those things that had Iraq as the exclusive purpose."
The administration, Wolfowitz said, had tried "scrupulously" to live up to reporting requirements to Congress.
I've got no actual proof that Wolfowitz is lying, but I am going to call him a liar anyway because I am no longer inclined to give anyone in this administration the benefit of the doubt.
And as David Sirota points out, if Wolfowitz and the rest aren't lying, they've got some explaining to do.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 9:40 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, April 20, 2004 |
|
|
|
Job-Hunting Tips: Calling the Interviewer a Queer Isn't Helpful
Unless you're trying to get a role as an extra on The 'L' Word or something, I suppose.
Turns out that Manuel Miranda's op-ed in the Pittsburgh Scaife-Fishwrapper isn't making him a lot of friends on the Hill. But then again, maybe he's not really interested in going back there; he says it's someone else's "crusade."The saga of ousted Senate Republican aide Manuel Miranda continues, but this latest chapter shows Miranda's friends may not be doing their champion any favors. The American Conservative Union is pushing to get Miranda rehired by a Republican — any Republican — on the Senate Judiciary Committee, but Miranda appears to have pretty well scotched that option thanks to an article he wrote for last weekend's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Sunday magazine. In his piece on 'Memogate,' Miranda managed to slam both Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee, as well as Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who is in line to be the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee... Miranda's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article has sections titled 'Pocket Liberals,' 'Emasculated GOP' and 'Seduced by Access,' and is basically one long screed against Hatch and Specter... And finally: 'I do admit that reading these documents on an unprotected server to help defend the president's embattled nominees was political hardball, and I have learned one shouldn't play hardball with limpwristed teammates.' When asked how the article helped his future job prospects on Judiciary, Miranda said that was ACU's crusade, not his. You'll need a subscription to Roll Call to read the entire thing.
The Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee (clockwise from top left): Orrin G. Hatch, Chairman; Charles E. Grassley; Arlen Specter; John Kyl; Mike DeWine; Jeff Sessions; Lindsey Graham; Larry Craig; Saxby Chambliss. Not pictured: John Cornyn.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 6:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, This Is a Really Good Idea
It looks like our clients have set up a court to try Saddam and other Ba'athists. And on the delicate question of who could run such a tribunal without sacrificing legitimacy on the one hand or effectivenss on the other, what's the decision?Salem Chalabi, a U.S.-educated lawyer and nephew of the head of the Iraqi National Congress, was named as general director of the tribunal, and he has named a panel of seven judges and four prosecutors, INC spokesman Entefadh Qanbar said. You know, you keep thinking the idiots in charge of this debacle can't get any more inept, and almost every week you're proven wrong.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 6:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oregon Marrige Decision
It's out:As promised, the judge in the Oregon same-sex marriage case ruled quickly, and his decision on Tuesday put an immediate stop to Multnomah County officials issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The decision shut down the last remaining U.S. civic outpost for same-sex nuptials.
Multnomah County Circuit Judge Frank Bearden said he believes the Oregon Constitution "would allow either a civil union or [marriage] privileges to same-sex couples," the Associated Press reported. The encyclopedic Howard Bashman provides the link to the pfd of the decision. Note the new address for How Appealing. I see from TalkLeft that it's a paid gig. Mazel tov, Howard.
posted by
Helena Montana at 4:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pot to Discuss Kettles at Cato
Next Tuesday, the Cato Institute will be holding a policy forum entitled "Triumph of the Hacks?" The Bush White House believes that "good policies make for good politics." But critics like John DiIulio and Paul O’Neill complain that the administration has sacrificed solid policy analysis on the altar of political expediency. They cite such policies as tariffs on steel, the Medicare drug benefit, and runaway federal spending as examples of politics undermining good policy. Have the hacks routed the wonks in the Bush administration?
The panel will include Bruce Reed and Ron Suskind ... and David Frum, presumably to speak for the hacks.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 4:05 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, Those Nasty Bush-Haters
I posted earlier on Scott Paterno's run for Congress. One of the few things Paterno has accomplished in his 31 years on the planet is writing a series of op-eds for the college newspaper in the mid-90s. Among his columns celebrating collegiate drug and alcohol abuse was an endorsement of the wingnut theory that Bill Clinton was a serial killer.Anyone who has information that is damaging to Clinton's presidency has conveniently, and mysteriously, died. The list of Clinton dead makes Charlie Manson look like a petty criminal. Among those I haven't discussed is Luther Parks, and it illustrates most clearly what happens when you threaten Bill Clinton.
Parks was owed $81,000 from Clinton for providing security for the former Governor. He had kept a file about Clinton's dealings when he was providing security. After publicly threatening to talk if he wasn't paid, he was gunned down in Little Rock, Ark. by four or five assailants. His son was quoted as saying ". . . they had my father killed to save Bill Clinton."
That is what happens to people who threaten this president. They die, they die fast and they die before they can do any damage. Now, you'd assume the people who've been kvetching about the meanie Democrats' "uncivil" discourse about George W. Bush would repudiate this garbage, which is much, much nastier than the sort of thing that sends David Brooks to his computer to churn out another whiny column about civility. Why, then, have Bush defenders like Rick Santorum and Geroge H.W. Bush picked Paterno out of a large pool of Republican primary candidates to support? Paterno's beating his rivals in the money-raising game largely on the strength of a fund-raiser that Papa Bush attended in person.
OK, we all have youthful indiscretions, so maybe he's turned over a new leaf. Except that the Clinton-is-a-murderer column is posted on Paterno's official campaign website.
By the way, this libel was a staple of wingnut Clinton-hating. No less a luminary of the Christian right faction of the Republican Party than Jerry Falwell subsidized the Clinton Chronicles video peddling this nonsense, and Republican congressmen and senators were connected to earlier versions.
Boy, those Bush-haters have really lowered the tone, haven't they?
posted by
Arnold P. California at 3:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poor, Poor Dr. Dino
It seems that he has run afoul of the taxman. Via CT's Weblog, we learn that the creative creationist is evading taxes on more than $1 million in income according to the IRS. After reading the news story, I simply had to find pictures or descriptions of the theme park. Folks, if you ever find yourself in Pensacola and need a break from all the anti-abortion protesting, be sure to check out Dinosaur Adventure Land. Who knows how long it'll be there?
posted by
Helena Montana at 2:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taking Issue With Ivins
Molly Ivins weighs in on Bush's decision to name John Negroponte to serve as the ambassador to Iraq after June 30 Meanwhile, back in the real world, the administration has announced its intention to make John Negroponte our first ambassador to postwar Iraq, to take up residence in what will be the world's largest embassy after June 30. Negroponte was one of the key figures in the Iran-Contra scandal, the cockeyed plot that sold U.S. arms to Iran and used the money to finance an illegal war in Nicaragua. So, our first ambassador will be a man who armed Iraq's enemy during that war.
I have read several things about Iran/contra, most notably Theodore Draper's "A Very Thin Line: The Iran-Contra Affairs" and I barely recall seeing Negroponte's name.
Negroponte was US ambassador to Honduras at the time and as David Corn explains [He] facilitated a clandestine quid pro quo deal, under which the Reagan Administration sent aid to Honduras in return for Honduran assistance to the contras, at a time when Congress had banned the Administration from assisting the contras. Negroponte's embassy also suppressed information about human rights abuses committed by the Honduran military.
Whatever Negroponte's failings, he had nothing to do with the decision to illegally sell missiles to Iran and divert the money from those sales to illegally fund the contra war in Nicaragua. The entire Iran aspect of the scandal was managed by people in, or very close to, the White House.
Ivins ought to know that. If she doesn't know that, she at least ought to refrain from blaming Negroponte for things she obviously doesn't understand.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 12:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Say it Ain't So, Joe!
Tell us your son isn't really threatening to join the U.S. Congress.
Whitehouse.org's spoof on Scott Paterno's candidacy is very funny, though down to their usual standards of offensiveness and crudity. But if you want to move from amused to frightened, check out a few of the hyperlinks in their piece; it turns out that a lot of the weird stuff in the "satire" piece about young Scott is true.
Update: By the way, this district is definitely "in play." The Republicans severely gerrymandered Pennsylvania after the 2000 census; at the time, the controlled both houses of the state legislature and the governor's office, so there wasn't much to stop them (In 2002, Democrat Ed Rendell was elected governor). The Supreme Court has heard arguments in Vieth v. Jubelirer, a case challenging the gerrymander as being so extreme that it violates the Constitution. The Court's decision will be one of the most important of a Term that's loaded with big cases, because it will decide for practical purposes whether the courts are going to try to curb gerrymandering or leave it up to the political process to reform the system.
Anyway, the 17th District is the one where the Republicans messed up a bit. They paired two incumbent congressmen, one Republican and one Democrat, in a district with a 3-to-2 advantage for Republicans in voter registration. The idea, obviously, was to knock off the incumbent Democrat and create a district with a narrow but reliable Republican tilt. But the Republican, George Gekas, ran a terrible campaign in 2002 and was very narrowly beaten by Democrat Tim Holden. Republicans think Holden is vulnerable in defending a district that is not only mostly Republican but also includes a lot of territory that wasn't in his old district and where voters therefore likely have less loyalty to him. That's why not only Paterno but five other Republicans are vying for a shot at Holden (one of them is an ex-Penn State linebacker, so perhaps they'll split the Nittany Lion vote).
Paterno has the backing of George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Rick Santorum, which makes him the frontrunner--in spite of the fact that he's never accomplished anything other than being born to a famous father. Well, I guess that would account for Dubya's endorsement, at least.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 12:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forget About Oil
If President Bush doesn't address this alarming price spike soon, he'll never get my vote.
I wonder if Prince Bandar has any contacts in the cocoa cartel.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 12:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Says Who?
Crazy right wing nutjobs, that's who The Federal Election Commission has opened a formal probe into a star-studded Aug. 12, 2000 Hollywood fund-raiser for then-first lady Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign, Fox News Channel reported on Sunday.
And some say the development is at least partly responsible for Sen. Clinton's claim that she's not interested in joining John Kerry's presidential ticket.
Will their Hillary fetish never wane?
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 11:45 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reality Check
We're not supposed to read stories like this or see images like this...but I think it's important that we do.
If, as Americans, we can't face the reality of what we're doing then we shouldn't be so willing to do it.
(Story via Daily Kos.)
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 10:49 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There They Go Again, Again
Fascinating case from the Ninth Circuit yesterday. Unlike the one I blogged yesterday, I don't see much reason for the Supreme Court to review this one, and I hope the California Attorney General concludes he has better things to do with the state's meager resources than to try to convince the Court to take it. But I'm pretty sure that if the Court happened to review it, this would be another reversal.
Yesterday's is a three-strikes case where the panel majority said the California courts had "unreasonably applied" Supreme Court precedent on the question of whether the 25-to-life sentence was so disproportionate to the offense as to be cruel and unusual punishment. Judge Kleinfeld, a very conservative judge who in my not-so-humble-opinion isn't terribly principled, wrote a thoughtful dissent, agreeing that the sentence was unjust but saying that under federal law and Supreme Court precedent, the federal courts have no choice but to defer to the California court's judgment that the sentence was legal. I think Kleinfeld is right: even though the outcome here is substantively just—letting the guy out of prison after he's served an already too-long period in prison—it's not lawful—lower-court judges have to obey Supreme Court precedent and the (awful) rules Congress set in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA).
Anyway, a few excerpts from Kleinfeld's dissenting opinion will give you a better flavor of this fascinating case:I agree with the majority that Ramirez's sentence is inappropriately harsh. For shoplifting a $199 videocassette recorder, having previously shoplifted twice before, he was sentenced to spend between 25 years and the rest of his life in prison, with no eligibility for parole until he has served at least 25 years. Even Hammurabi limited the penalty for an eye to an eye.
[snip]
Even the reasonable victim of such a crime would not want to visit such harsh punishment on the criminal. Nor would a reasonable person favor spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to incarcerate Ramirez for decades to protect stores from the occasional $200 shoplifting. And despite his criminality, a fair sentence cannot, of course, ignore the impact on Ramirez. Our societal norm against stealing is not intense enough to justify a sentence comparable to what people get for rape or murder. What Ramirez has done, repeatedly, is just not bad enough to justify wasting most of the rest of his life in a cage.
As the majority points out, Ramirez argued his own case before us pro se. He did it so well that I did not realize until well into his argument that he was the petitioner and not a lawyer for the petitioner. My impression from the record and from our extensive colloquy with this man during oral argument is that he is a good and intelligent man whose self control occasionally gives way under the stresses of life to a criminal impulse that he expresses by stealing something from a store. The 5 1/2 years he already served for his most recent crime seem like an adequate social response even with his having done it twice before.
But these are all thoughts I would have were I the sentencing judge. I am not. We are not. The question whether a writ of habeas corpus should issue to a state prison warden is quite different from whether the sentence is justifiable. It is even different from whether we think the sentence is grossly disproportionate to the crime. We can only grant relief if the sentence was grossly disproportionate and if the state court's determination that it was not grossly disproportionate was contrary to or an unreasonable application of Supreme Court law.
[snip]
In the end, what prevents me from joining the majority, which I would very much like to do, is the word "unreasonable" in AEDPA. The Supreme Court has said, on several occasions, that "unreasonable" means not just wrong, but so wrong as to be "objectively unreasonable." The Court told us in Andrade that even "[t]he gloss of clear error fails to give proper deference to state courts by conflating error (even clear error) with unreasonableness."
[snip]
Andrade means, as a practical matter, that the federal courts, on habeas review, have extremely limited authority over the harshness of state sentences. It operates more as a federalism decision than as an Eighth Amendment decision. Ramirez's sentence would stand, under my reluctant reading, not because it is just as between California and Ramirez, but because it is lawful as between the state and federal judiciaries. Thus, I do not think we have the authority to do what the majority does, and what I would like to do. Andrade, by the way, was a three-strikes case in which the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit last year. The facts, as the majority in the new case describes them, were:For stealing a total of $153 worth of videotapes from two different K-Mart department stores on separate occasions in November 1995, Andrade was sentenced, in light of his prior theft-related offenses, to two consecutive Three Strikes sentences of 25 years to life, with no eligibility for parole until he served 50 years in prison. Id. at 66. Like the plurality in Ewing, the Court looked beyond Andrade's two most recent convictions to detail his extensive criminal history, during which he had been "in and out of state and federal prison since 1982." Idat 66. Although Andrade had a much lengthier criminal record than Ramirez, the petitioner in the current case, you can see why I think the Supreme Court would reverse here if it bothered to take the case. But since the Court just laid down the law in this area last year, I doubt it will want to revisit the question so soon; as the Court often says, its function is not to correct all of the mistakes made by the circuit courts.
I've made my low opinion of so-called "federalism" clear before; I think AEDPA is a terrible law; I think the prosecutor should be ashamed for charging Ramirez with a third-strike offense when the crime was a "wobbler" that could have been charged as a two-year maximum sentence case; and I think the trial judge royally screwed up by not exercising his authority to disregard one of the strikes. But judges have to follow the law, even if it's lousy law, and I think the panel majority failed to do its job by ignoring Congress's statute and the Supreme Court's binding interpretations of that statute and of the Eighth Amendment. I like the result, but that's not the point.
Update: San Francisco's legal newspaper has a lengthy story on this case, headlined: "Despite 'Andrade,' 9th Circuit Rules Theft Sentence Too Long."Ramirez, who has a history of using drugs and stealing, also argued his own case in front of the 9th Circuit. He said he wasn't nervous when he appeared in front of the circuit panel July 18 because he received all the legal advice he needed after converting to Christianity while in prison.
"I trusted in the Lord that he would complete this," Ramirez said. "He was the greatest lawyer of all."
[California Attorney General Bill] Lockyer's office said it was reviewing the decision and would not comment on whether it plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The opinion also criticizes the AG for not trying to reach a settlement with Ramirez -- which the court asked Lockyer to do -- instead of litigating at the 9th Circuit.
[snip]
The opinion is unusual in that it is openly critical of another judge, San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Margaret Powers, who is quoted in Wardlaw's ruling. Because Ramirez used security tape to package up the VCR box and because he already had a buyer for the property, Powers said Ramirez had clearly become a "professional thief," even though five years had passed between the theft and the earlier robbery counts.
[snip]
Upon release, Ramirez went to work for his church, New Hope Family Worship Center in Corona, doing maintenance and running the church's prison ministry. He said he now plans to file a writ in federal court to remove a monitoring device from his ankle.
Ramirez said he hoped his story encourages people to vote for a new initiative that would change Three Strikes so that only violent offenses would count as strikes. Proponents have turned in about 700,000 signatures, which is nearly twice the number needed to qualify for the November ballot. Any readers who can vote in California, do your duty; if you can't get rid of this abominable law, at least cut back on its most grossly unjust applications.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 10:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oi! Oi! Oi!
Now this is what I call coalition building! Appealing to my inner punk-sk8er-industrial-goth girl, a lot of my old faves have banded together to for an unprecedented "Punk Voter" registration drive project!
The project's "Rock Against Bush 2004" tour has 26 bands and more than a few famous punk legends connected to the project. Personally I'm really excited about the likes of the Descendants, Dag Nasty, Bad Religion, Circle Jerks, D.O.A., Mudhoney, Sick of it All, Propagandhi, Lunachicks, tool, Subhumans, Sonic Youth, NOFX, Ministry, Mike Watt (of fIREHOSE), Social Distortion, and the Dickies! And the whole thing is sponsored by none other than the punk legend JELLO BIAFRA! (Jello was a personal hero of mine when I was an angry young thing. Because of him, I will forever hold a grudge against Diane Feinstein.)
A cd teaser for the tour-- Rock Against Bush vol. 1-- is out today and cheap to boot! Only $6 and all proceeds go to Punk Voter! While it may seem like the punk voting demographic is too small to have a noticable impact, the NOFX bass player who came up with the project says it came to him during the aftermath of the 2000 election. Fat Mike says he was especially outraged when it occured to him that "I've probably sold 50,000 records in Florida. If 500 of the fans had voted in 2000, it could have been a different election." Hmmmm. Frankly, it's interesting that the malcontents who generally operate totally outside of "the system" are getting together to push something as conventional as voting. This is a very good sign.
(As cool as this all is, I also feel a little pathetic that I just stumbled on it today. Or that I first found about it via a Bush-worshipping right-wing news site! But at least I found it!)
posted by
Zoe Kentucky at 10:04 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Watergate Bothers Me
So Bob Woodward is exposing another Republican administration's duplicitous and possibly illegal behavior, some of which is tied directly to a reelection campaign.
With that in mind, I offer this interesting paragraph from Keith Olson's "Watergate: The Presidential Scandal That Shook America." On July 10, 1973 when John Mitchell [Nixon's Attorney General who resigned to head his reelection campaign] testified before the Senate Watergate Committee, he explained why he withheld information about the Watergate break-in from the police and the FBI; why he failed to report information about Donald Segretti's dirty tricks campaign that Mitchell called "the White House Horrors"; and why he did not report information about individuals who he knew had committed perjury to cover up these crimes. One committee member reminded Mitchell that during the 1972 campaign he knew that Magruder, Hadleman, Erlichman, and persons "all around" the president were "involved in crime, perjury, accessory after the fact, and you deliberately refused to tell Nixon." The senators then asked the former attorney general, "Would you state that the expediency of the election was more important than that?" Mitchell replied, "Senator, I think you have put it exactly correct. In my mind, the reelection of Richard Nixon, compared with what was available on the other side, was so much more important that I put it in just that context." The next day Mitchell testified again and repeated the logic behind his perjury and obstruction of justice: "The most important thing to this country was the reelection of Richard Nixon and I was not about to countenance anything that would stand in the way of the reelection."
Stanley Kutler in his book, "The Wars of Watergate," gives a chilling description of just how far Nixon and his aides were willing to go to achieve their ends One of the more bizarre by-products of the Pentagon Papers affair was a plan either to raid or to firebomb the Brookings Institution and to pilfer papers there belonging to Leslie Gelb and Morton Halperin, former National Security Council aides. These papers allegedly represented a Pentagon Papers analogue for the Nixon years. The Brookings plan has been described by three people: Erlichman, Dean, and Caufield. All agreed that Charles Colson pushed the idea, but all asserted that Nixon inspired it.
Of course, Charles Colson has since found God and, in this new capacity, works with Bush on "faith-based" initiatives.
Keep in mind that John Dean says the current administration is "Worse than Watergate."
You ought to read one of the above listed books if you don't understand how truly frightening that idea really is.
posted by
Eugene Oregon at 9:54 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, April 19, 2004 |
|
|
|
Why Am I Not Surprised...
...that Miguel Miranda is a fag-hater?
There's so much wrong with his self-pitying piece in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that it's not worth the effort to catalog all of it. Besides, we've heard it all before, particularly the "they-left-the-window-open-so-I-didn't-do-anything-wrong-by-stealing-their-stereo" defense.
But the homophobia is an especially nice touch. What lesson has Miranda taken from his well-earned public disgrace? "I have learned that one shouldn't play hardball with limpwristed teammates."
I can see why the American Conservative Union is working so hard to get this gem back on Capitol Hill.
And homophobia seems like the right term; the guy has an obvious fear about his manhood. In a section headed "Emasculated GOP," Miranda writes:By bowing to Hatch's ill-advised leadership on the propriety of reading the Democrat [sic] memos, Republicans rendered themselves emasculated from investigating the corruption evidenced in the Democrat [sic] memos themselves. "Emasculated from investigating?" I'm not sure that's even English. Apparently, Miranda thinks the real issue on the Hill is whether Orrin Hatch's penis is bigger than Tom Daschle's—and, frankly, I'd rather they kept that information on a need-to-know basis.
Oh, by the way: Arlen Specter, consider your manhood questioned. The op-ed ran in a Pennsylvania paper 10 days before Specter's primary, in which right-winger Pat Toomey and his supporters in the punditocracy have contended that Specter hasn't been tough enough in supporting Bush's nominees and can't be allowed to become the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee (as he's in line to do if he's reelected and the Republicans retain a Senate majority). And the piece ran across from the Richard Mellon Scaife rag's pro-Toomey editorial:From matters constitutional to those fiscal, Specter is a twisting, porking, Scottish law-invoking wild-card sophist whom Republicans serious about reforming government can no longer afford or trust. Specter as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee? Horrors! The message to primary voters is clear, if coded: Specter's, you know, one of them, figuratively at least. You know, the kind you don't want with you in a foxhole.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 8:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There They Go Again
The oft-criticized Ninth Circuit is about to get overruled by the Supreme Court again. A few weeks back, the Court handed down three decisions, all of which were reversals of the Ninth Circuit, and an ex-Ninth Circuit clerk friend of mine sent me an e-mail saying purporting to be a quote from the majority opinion: "This case comes to us from the Ninth Circuit, but there are other reasons for reversing." The sad part is that I went to the majority opinion to see if the quote was really there; it wasn't so obvious that this was a joke.
Now, I think that conservatives' attacks on this court are a bit overwrought at times, and I think that the common observation that the Ninth Circuit gets reversed more often than any other can be misleading. But, anyway, they're going to be reversed at least once more in the Supreme Court Term that starts in October. The Court today granted certiorari (i.e., agreed to hear an appeal) in a Ninth Circuit case. BNA (an information service for lawyers and others) summarized the case:Does an arrest violate the Fourth Amendment when a police officer has probable cause to make an arrest for one offense if that offense is not closely related to the offense articulated by the officer at the time of the arrest? Some federal circuits, including the Ninth Circuit below, have held that an arrest is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment only if there is probable cause to arrest for crimes that are "closely related" to the crime or crimes articulated by the arresting officer. Other circuits deem an arrest reasonable if there is probable cause to believe that any violation of law has occurred. In other words, if the cop says, "You're under arrest for murder," and a judge later says there was no probable cause to believe the suspect had committed murder, but it turns out that there was probable cause to arrest the suspect for burglary, is the arrest illegal? Without doing a bit of research into this area of law, I am quite confident in saying that the only suspense in this case is whether the vote for reversal will be 9-0, 8-1, or 7-2.
(The facts of the case, by the way, are quite interesting, if you want to check out the Ninth Circuit's opinion (and the dissent). The plaintiff was arrested for tape-recording his conversation with police officers who had pulled him over; the officers said the recording violated the state's Privacy Act, but it turns out that it was quite clear under state court decisions that offical activities of police officers weren't considered "private" for purposes of that statute. The Privacy Act charge was later dismissed. However, it seems as if the plaintiff (kind of a weirdo, from all appearances), was probably impersonating a police officer by having his car outfitted with "wig-wag" headlights and other paraphernalia, so the question becomes whether the fact that they could have arrested him for impersonating an officer excuses their having arrested him on a bogus Privacy Act charge.)
posted by
Arnold P. California at 12:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Kentucky GOP is Seriously Regressing
No, not in terms of social progress, although that might well be true. I mean in age. Check out this story. It is waaaaay funnier than it has any right to be.A battle for control of the Jefferson County Republican Party turned physical last weekend, after an argument that one GOP delegate said left him with a bruised arm.
Now John Lawlor has sworn out a warrant against Peter Hayes, charging him with assault. He says Hayes punched him in the arm hard enough to cause a bruise. What's the brouhaha? Well, Lawlor is an ex-gay and says that Hayes asked if he was screwing some other guy there. Hayes claims he didn't. Then Lawlor called Hayes a "Moonie." You can almost hear the reporter laughing as he writes and I can't blame him.Hayes said: "I asked him how come you didn't do the right thing, and he said, `It's because you're a Moonie and I don't want to work with you.' Then, he started saying, `Moonie, Moonie, Moonie, Moonie, Moonie.'"
Lawlor recalled saying only "Moonie, Moonie, Moonie."
Hayes said he believes Lawlor, who serves on the party's nominations committee, blocked his candidacy because of his religion. That violates his constitutional rights, Hayes said. A piece of advice for the county GOP head: Next time, just carry around some extra lollies. It might help keep peace in the sandbox.
posted by
Helena Montana at 12:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad Writing Makes My Day
At least it does when it's this hilariously overwraught screed against Catholic academia. My favorite passage:And across the Delaware River in the Garden State, New Jersey's only Catholic university, Seton Hall, will host an awards ceremony named after Sandra Day O'Connor, a pro-abortion rights Supreme Court jurist. O'Connor was a key vote in striking down a ban on partial-birth abortion. Nonetheless, Seton Hall is more than willing to open its arms, and the hearts of its students, to an ideological cholesterol that is determined to clog the arteries of the Catholic theology. Go ahead, read the rest. There's plenty of florid metaphor to go around, with phrases like "ecclesiastical treason," "forces of Hell," and "destroyers of the faith." Thanks to Joe Murray of the American Family Association. I needed that.
posted by
Helena Montana at 12:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I Was Just Thinking . . .
I've had a reasonably news-free weekend, so maybe I've missed this, but so far I haven't heard anyone making what seems like a fairly obvious point about Israel's killing of yet another Hamas leader.
After Israel killed the founder of Hamas, there was at least one faction of Hamas that said Americans were now fair game--a new step for an organization that had expressly disclaimed any intention of acting outside the Middle East. The claim was that Sharon wouldn't have carried out the assassination without American approval. (IIRC, it may even have been the late Mr. Rantisi himself who promulgated this policy shift).
Now, one may disagree with that line of reasoning, but it seems likely that not a few people in the Arab and Muslim worlds would have had some sympathy with it.
So what are folks in that part of the planet going to think when Bush invites Sharon to Washington and signs off on his plan to annex chunks of the West Bank, and Sharon then kills the new Hamas head literally within days of returning from his meeting with Bush?
When you get into bed with a war criminal like Sharon, you can wind up looking pretty sleazy in the morning. Whether or not Bush had any advance knowledge of the missile attack is almost irrelevant. By aligning us so closely not just with Israel, but with Sharon personally, Bush took the risk that Sharon would commit a provocation to the Arab and Muslim worlds and we would take the blame.
The thing about this administration's foreign policy is that you can abandon the old moralistic lefty "we should do what's right" stance, and the policy still stinks. In other words, from the "realist" perspective that "we should do what's in our interest," these clowns are making a colossal mess. We're not safer, we have fewer friends, we're losing troops by the hundreds, we're bankrupting ourselves, we're creating more fertile recruiting grounds for terrorists.
"Miserable failure" was an understatement.
posted by
Arnold P. California at 11:34 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|