David Brooks as Travis Bickle

David Brooks, NYTimes: "Floods wash away the surface of society, the settled way things have been done. They expose the underlying power structures, the injustices, the patterns of corruption and the unacknowledged inequalities. When you look back over the meteorological turbulence in this nation's history, it's striking how often political turbulence followed."

Travis Bickle, Taxi Driver : All the animals come out at night - whores, skunk pussies, buggers, queens, fairies, dopers, junkies, sick, venal. Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.

George Will on Judicial Activism: It's a Good Thing

George Will comes out in favor of 'judicial activism' and says good conservatives should favor it, too. Why? Because it favors the Constitution in its constructionist mean over modern majoritarian impulses (popular in the Republican party because, hey, they're the majority); and the constructionist interpretation offers deference to the majority of the founding -- an unusually deliberative moment which deserves such deference.

What's useful about the OpEd is it draws a clean line between constuctionism (one conservative meme) and anti-activism, and effectively chides Republicans for giving in to the majoritarian spoils system. Activist away!

NPR : Hundreds Die in Panic on Baghdad Bridge -- poisoning?

NPR report claims that 158 people (according to the Iraqi ministry of health) died from poisoning during the same pilgramage, in addition to the hundreds who died in the crush on the bridge.

The End of New Orleans

As busses convoy out the remaining 20% of New Orleans' population to parts unknown, you've gotta ask: who are those people, and will they come back?

The 20% of New Orleans' population were those who could not afford to heed the mayor's evacuation call -- they don't have cars, and couldn't afford to leave otherwise. They live hand to mouth, and month-to-month at best. When they get to wherever they are going (the Astrodome in Houston for many of them), they are going to have to find jobs to survive in the interim, and once they do, why would they come back? Before you've even started about rebuilding, 20% of the population is gone.

And the remaining 80%? Their factories and workplaces are wiped off the map. There won't be anyplace for anyone to work; construction will be up, but it will be months before anyone could come back to the office job they used to have. And how do they live until then? To me, this sounds like, before you even start, New Orleans has lost 50% of its population. And losing that much it's hardly likely the city could recover to its pre-hurricane economic level for decades.

Genie Grants Scalia Strict Constructionist Interpretation Of Wish

The Onion offers relief for the day: "WASHINGTON, DC—A genie freed from a battered oil lamp by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia granted the conservative jurist a strict constructionist interpretation of his wish for 'a hundred billion bucks' Monday. 'Sim sim salabim! Your wish is my command!' the genie proclaimed amid flashes of light and purple smoke, immediately filling the Supreme Court building with a massive herd of wild male antelopes. When Justice Scalia complained that the 'bucks' had razed the U.S. Supreme Court building, trampling and killing several of his clerks and bringing traffic in the nation's capital to a standstill for hours, the genie said, 'Your honor, your wish is a sacred and unalterable document whose interpretation is not subject to the whims of society and changing social context.'"

Astrodome to Shelter Superdome Refugees

Now that's going to be a hell of a T-shirt.

American Pompeii

New Orleans Is Now Off Limits.

And outrageous: the military is performing the relief effort. Our National Guard is in Iraq, and the Military is doing relief at home. That's a complete reversal -- and a very inefficient use of our personnel resources.

Great OpEd in the Times -

by Francis Fukuyama : "With the failure to secure Sunni support for the constitution and splits within the Shiite community, it seems increasingly unlikely that a strong and cohesive Iraqi government will be in place anytime soon. Indeed, the problem now will be to prevent Iraq's constituent groups from looking to their own militias rather than to the government for protection. If the United States withdraws prematurely, Iraq will slide into greater chaos. That would set off a chain of unfortunate events that will further damage American credibility around the world and ensure that the United States remains preoccupied with the Middle East to the detriment of other important regions - Asia, for example - for years to come."

NYT Eds Don't Like Bush

New Orleans lies in ruins, and the NYT Editorial board can't resist the urge to needle President Bush about it:

But this seems like the wrong moment to dwell on fault-finding, or even to point out that it took what may become the worst natural disaster in American history to pry President Bush out of his vacation. All the focus now must be on rescuing the survivors.

Wrong moment, huh? Au contraire, mon amis! I think it's never a bad time to get snarky on the Dubyah.

Bush's Legacy

That household income has dropped for five straight years -- -the longest decline on record -- and poverty rates are up again to what they were before Clinton took office pretty much seals the deal.


It's time, with midterms in the next year, to wind up Bush's legacy. Here it is: he is absolutely the worst president we have ever had. This, coupled with situations ready to spiral out of control, are about to sink the country into the worst social unrest of the past century. Combine inside the torn psyches of Americans the twin disorder of realizing the lie and costs of Iraq, with the deteriorating economy at home, and genuine anger is the result.

Why do I come to this conclusion today? Wed, Aug 31? The answer is New Orleans. The destruction there, the active way this administration removed disaster preparedness which led to it's present state, the crime and disorder it sees, the real possibility that the city will not recover -- literally, effectively wiped off the map -- due to the lack of preparedness and the budget deficit which makes any real National response impossible; the likelihood of $3 gas --- all of this will chime in the ears of people who have come to accept that we are in a war based on lies, spending over a Trillion dollars to do nothing but create another civil war in a country which posed no military threat to us. People can handle the knowledge that they were liied to. However, when the lies have real consequences, they get very angry.

U.S. Poverty Rate Rises to 12.7 Percent - New York Times

That's six million more Americans living in poverty now than when Bush took office in 2000. Total number of Americans now living in poverty: 37 Million

The last time the poverty rate was this high -- 12.7% --- was 1993, just after W.'s dad left office.

Like I've said -- now is the time to be very, very rich in the U.S. Everyone else is losing ground.

Sheehanization

The steady, simple, and undeniable statement, made over and over in the press, is finally filtering its way into the higher edges of the Democratic party: We were led to war on a lie. Facts are funny, persistent things.

Gary Hart in the WaPost:: "The real defeatists are those in power and their silent supporters in the opposition party who are reduced to repeating 'Stay the course' even when the course, whatever it now is, is light years away from the one originally undertaken. The truth is we're way off course. We've stumbled into a hornet's nest. We've weakened ourselves at home and in the world. We are less secure today than before this war began."

Religious Extremist Calls for Presidential Assassination

Unbelievable. And all broadcast on a television show.

Well, okay, sure, the television show was "The 700 Club." it was Pat Robertson, who called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

"We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator," he continued. "It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

Update 9:00pm, Aug 23: and now everyone is piling on Pat Robertson . As it should be.

NYT vs Onion on Intelligent Design

NYT says:

Proponents of intelligent design say biological marvels point to the hand of a higher being, but mainstream scientists are unconvinced.

The Onion says:

Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

Score one for the Onion - or two, actually, since the NYT piece is second in a two-part series on the subject, altogether weighing in at maybe 3000 words, while the Onion gets the point across in a single headline.

US Blows Away NAFTA

Ugh The US and Canadian trade agreements are basically free trade. However, recently, the US has put a tarrif on Canadian soft lumber, and collected $5B doing so. Canada has taken the issue to every single body established under NAFTA to mediate, and all of them have found in Canada's favor. Last week, they went to the trial of last resort: the Extraordinary Challenge Committee. No kidding. It was put into the treaty by the US, who wanted it there as a 'last resort' for trade disputes. And they found in Canada's favor. And so the US said: "Tough, we'll still collect the tarrif. You can't stop us." Really. So, now Canada is going to the WTO to ask permission to levy $5B in retaliatory tarrifs.

Harvard Med School grad confuses science, religion

Apparently, Harvard Med School graduates - at least some of them - cannot be depended on to distinguish religion from science. Instead, they advocate as a matter of public policy that thinly-veiled religious doctrine be taught in American public school science classes.

Oddly, however, even in advocating this comingling of the magisteria, they do not promote or even mention the idea of teaching evolution by natural selection in Sunday School.

Thanks to TPM for the link. See also my earlier post on the similar difficulties afflicting some of our nation's Yale graduates.

Pope to Jews:

"Beware of rising Anti-semitism.

Jews to pope: Yeah, thanks for the heads up pope. Glad you've got your ear to the ground. Anti-semitism. We'll keep an eye out.

Cheney mourns Iraq war deaths? In This Chilly Weather?

They say Dick Cheney is mourning Iraq war deaths. How could they be so sure? He didn't even bother to put on his mourning parka.

In the Face of the President

Bush got to see an anti-war protest today. Six mothers of soldiers killed in Iraq, including Cindy Sheehan, and dozens of supporters.

I'm guessing he's never seen one before.

Al Qaida Determined To Strike In US

It turns out that military intelligence officials knew that the 9/11 leader Mohamed Atta was in Al Qaida and might be in a US based terror cell one year before the attacks. The Sept 11 commission knew this information, but purposely left it out of their final report.

The End of Canada

Those crazy Separatists. At 35% of the population, they're interested in getting the debate for removing themselves from Canada going, now. They think the Canadian federation has been a raw deal for them; so why tolerate it?

About what you'd expect from the Quebec Separatists right? Sure. But who's talking about Quebec separatists?

These are people in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan. (Young people, actually -- aged 18-29).

So if Quebec wants out at 40% of their population, and they're at similar numbers in those three major provinces -- and there's not even a crisis going on -- what, exactly, is holding this country together?

Turns out: not much.

For the record: the provinces which I don't have any statistics about their separtist ferver are: Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland (and Labrador), and Nunavit.

DeLay To Not Run in 2008

Resolved: that Tom DeLay declares candidacy for the Presidency in 2008.

Pro: Steve
Con: Bob. Who thinks DeLay's too busy opening foster homes for abused and neglected children.

Get dem Dukes!

With A.O. Scott's review of the Dukes of Hazzard movie, I can't understand why they aren't giving this gem a platform release.

Quick Geography Test

True or false: There exists a US-allied, oil-rich Islamic country called "Mauritania".

Ans: True. And they just had a military coup.

Yale grad considers evolution "one alternative"

It seems that Yale University graduates - at least some of them - cannot be counted on to distinguish between (1) The founding principle of modern biology and one of the most powerful unifying concepts in all of science, on the one hand; and (2) A dumb invocation of greater forces to "explain" the wonder and diversity of natural life, on the other.

It's a shock, I know. But 146 years after the discovery of evolution by natural selection, I humbly suggest that the Yale faculty consider introducing the subject into their core science requirement to alleviate the chances of such embarrassing episodes occurring in the future.

Bush to World & Senate Dems: Fuck You

He's now installed Big Time Asshole (that's an Administration technical term) John Bolton at the UN as our nation's - that is, your - Ambassador to the world. Reuters story.

Bush: Sympathetic to Boy Scouts, not to Soldiers

Bush went to a Boyscout Jamboree, where four scout masters had been killed during a lightning storm, and expressed his sympathy to the scouts. Sure, it's a tragedy.

But so are the close to 2000 deaths of American soldiers in the Iraq war. So why hasn't George Bush yet appeared at a funeral for an American soldier, to express sympathy to the family?

Roberts is Confirmed, so Why Does Bush Keep Talking About it?

Less than a week after his nomination for the Supreme Court, it's obvious that Roberts is headed for a successful appointment. The only major issue between him and the bench is the fact that he has almost no public paper trail revealing his judicial thinking, but he has an enormous paper trail in the Executive Branch: 1981-82, Aide to Attorney General William French Smith; 82-86, Aide to White House counsel Fred Fielding; 89-93, principal deputy solicitor general for Bush I. That's 11-12 years writing legal opinions for the Executive Branch -- all of which Bush had access to in making his decision. Compare that with 1.5 years on the D.C. Circuit, which is the paper trail the Senate has to examine his Judicial thinking. Executive privelige will keep the Senate from obtaining copies of Roberts' writings during those 12 years. It's safe to say that Bush knows every nuance of Roberts' judicial bent. The Senate cannot know it.

So, Bush's candidate will get onto the court, and I expect he'll be exactly the kind of Justice Bush's supporters want to see.

My point: this nomination is over.


So why is Bush still talking about it? Answer: to change the subject from the real subject: The Plame Affair.

Bush Always Knew About the Conspiracy In His Administration

The force of Derek's posts below is so convincing, it bears repeating.

Bush is playing poker with us -- holding cards, and looking over his shoulder is Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, Stephen Hadley, Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan. All of them are looking at his hand and saying the exact same things: "never said her name", "only if leaked classified information". Some of them are even bluffing: "had no involvement".

Now, we can't prove what's in that hand -- but we are hearing them all speak with the same voice, with the same words, because they are all playing the same hand. The President has always known, and he's helping them forward the conspiracy and obstruction. Anyone who plays poker can see that.

The important question which remains is - how do you get to see the cards?

Bush knew about Rove & Plame - Part 2

Since my last post on this subject, the President has finally made public reference to his 2003 pledge to lay off any members of his Administration involved in revealing the identity of a CIA covert operative - and her various front companies and all related government agents - to the world for the sake of a political vendetta.

What the President says now is that he will fire anyone found to have "committed a crime." (As Josh Marshall put it, he's set a high bar for his staff: no felons.) What he said then was that he would fire anyone found to have "leaked classified information." This is a revealing retreat on his part, mainly because the leaking of classified information is not itself a crime. Some news reports of the President's statement have claimed that he was clarifying (or "narrowing") his earlier position. Since the two statements refer to disjoint types of action, however, this cannot be the case.

As I pointed out in my earlier post, the President's statements - both directly and through spokesman Scott McClellan - have mirrored Karl Rove and his lawyer's justifications in near-eerie fashion throughout this scandal. His new position hews to this pattern, since obviously, Rove and his lawyer still hope to beat the rap, even though it is now public knowledge - not even denied by them - that Rove was involved in compromising Plame's covert status. They can maintain this hope because the governing statute sets a high bar for conviction; in any case, the wheels of justice grind exceeding slow.

We thus have four independent lines of argument that Bush knew - in 2003 - that Rove had played a role in compromising Plame's status:

1. His invocation of the phrase "classified information" in 2003, which was designed by Rove to exclude his own actions (see my previous post);
2. His lack of action in response to the revelation of Matthew Cooper's testimony about Rove. This absence of action confirms that the original pledge was not meant to apply to Rove;
3. His new statement, which appeals to an external standard for the first time, rather than referring to what actually happened (one presumes that the President can ask for the truth from his trusted aides);
4. His new statement, which retreats from the "classified information" standard, which would now very clearly indict Rove (who was too clever by half with that initial framing).

Simply because it is so hard to get one's head around, I'll say it again: The preponderance of the evidence implies that the President has, knowingly and for almost two years now, participated in keeping this traitor employed, with your tax dollars and a security clearance, in his Administration.

The White House Cover Up

Fitzpatrick is looking at Four Incidents of obstruction of Justice, two involving Rove, one involving Scooter Libby, and one involving Ari Fleishcer:

* White House chief political strategist Karl Rove reportedly told the grand jury that he first learned of Valerie Plame's identity from columnist Robert Novak -- but Novak's version of the story is that Rove already knew about her when the two spoke.

* Rove didn't mention his conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper to investigators at first and then said it was primarily about welfare reform. But Cooper has testified that the topic of welfare reform didn't came up.

* Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby apparently told prosecutors he first heard about Plame from NBC's Tim Russert, but Russert has testified that he neither offered nor received information about Plame in his conversation with Libby.

* And former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer apparently told prosecutors that he never saw a classified State Department memo that disclosed Plame's identity, but another former official reportedly saw him perusing it on Air Force One.

Civil Liberties for Security

As has always been said, ultimately, we will give up our civil liberties for security. After all, what do you have to hide?

Bloomberg: "Are they intrusive? Yes, a little bit. But we're trying to find the right balance."

Bush knew about Rove & Plame in 2003

Recall how in parsing the President's and Scott McClellan's statements in 2003 and 2004, we were all puzzled by their repeated invocation of the phrase "leaking classified information" when referring to the identification of Valerie Plame Willson as a CIA operative. For example:

George W. Bush - 30 September 2003 - "I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action."

Scott McClellan - 7 October 2003 - "If someone leaked classified information, the President wants to know. If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates."

This behavior seemed bizarre under the circumstances since the charge itself - knowingly revealing the identity of a CIA operative - makes no explicit reference to classified information. So why were Bush and his spokesperson treating this as just another leak?

At the time some thought this might be a clever attempt to broaden the outrage over a compromise of our national security into a full attack on government leaks, which have a tendency to embarass the Executive Branch more often than not. "Perhaps the Administration will use the scandal to push for an Official Secrets Act!" we thought.

In retrospect, though, I think this actually reveals that Bush and McClellan knew that Rove had been talking to reporters about Plame. Note how Rove & Luskin have recently been splitting this exact same hair between talking about Plame and "leaking classified information." Rove said that he "didn't know her name and didn't leak her name" (CNN, 31 July 2004) and Luskin now says that "Rove did not mention her name to Cooper" (Washington Post, 10 July 2005). This line of defense has even been refined to "Rove learned about Plame from a reporter" by several Rove loyalists. The explicit inference being that if reporters were giving this information to Rove, it could not be counted as classified information.

Various observers have suggested that Luskin has been neglecting his duties to his client by persisting in contorted and quickly-refuted non-denial denials. However, what if Luskin has been taking his talking points - even his very words - directly from Rove? It certainly sounds as if Bush and McClellan in 2003, and Luskin now, have been working from the same playbook.

If true, this is really quite stunning. For two years, our President has known that his Deputy Chief of Staff was involved in the revelation of a covert CIA operative's identity, and has done nothing about it.

At the same time, it explains why he is refusing to do anything about denying this traitor a government salary - or even a security clearance - now, when everyone else knows it as well.

Man Beats his Wife, Now Only 3 Nights A Week!

If a man came home drunk 4 nights a week and beat his wife, would it be good news if he "slashed" that number from 4 nights a week to 3 nights a week?

Heck no.


So why does Bush think it's good news that the deficit is going to be $333B instead of $427B?

Is The White House Involved in a Cover-Up?

Looks like Rove identified Mrs. Wilson as a CIA operative to Time's Matthews and, by implication, to Novak. McCLellan denied Rove had any involvement in that sorry episode, back in October 2003. Now, McClellan won't even talk about it. Neither will Bush. Both have shut up, because it's been made public that Rove had big BIG involvment in that sorry episode.



So what is a cover-up? Usually, it's when the White House won't talk about what it has done, because what it has done was illegal.

Here, what Rove did was illegal. And the White House won't talk about it.

Sounds like Bush and McClellan are leading a cover-up.

Rove Gave Novak The Name?

Rove has been running around saying "I never said her name." A statement which is ridiculous as one to clear him of identifying a covert CIA operative, since he clearly said "Joseph Wilson's Wife" was CIA, and we here in the US aren't polygamists.

Even more interesting, though, is that, in the very first article which came out about the leak, Novak states clearly he was given the name:

From Talking Points Memo: "The first newspaper report on the Plame outing was written by Timothy Phelps and Knut Royce in Newsday on July 22nd, 2003, about a week after Novak's column first ran.

The story's lede read: 'The identity of an undercover CIA officer whose husband started the Iraq uranium intelligence controversy has been publicly revealed by a conservative Washington columnist citing 'two senior administration officials.''

As you'd expect from that introduction, the whole focus of the article was Novak's exposure of an 'undercover' or covert agent. And the article, as you might also suspect, had a number of quotes from Wilson and others arguing for how damaging it was to have revealed the identity of a covert agent.

They interviewed Novak too. And this was his response: 'I didn't dig it out, it was given to me. They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.'"

Same TPM reference above: it appears the prosecuter may be investigating conspiracy which includes Novak and his White House Sources.

University Admittance Gender Discrimination

You know how it goes -- it's the old story of one particular group not having the same natural abilities of another, so you see what used to be objective criteria get slanted, and bent. This is exactly what is happening in Canada, where University admission standards are being relaxed to let in more men.

White House Reporters Openly Mocking Scott McClellan

Today during the press breifing, reporters in the White House got so fed up with the administration's stonewalling the Karl Rove issue that they took to openly mocking the spokesperson about his lack of credibility.

Press Briefing by Scott McClellan: "Q Does the President believe that it is outrageous for a Los Angeles advertising man to be conducting a campaign to persuade the town selectmen of Weare, New Hampshire, to approve the building of a hotel on the land where Justice Souter's house is located? Or does he regard this as an historic irony resulting from Souter's vote in the case of Kelo versus the City of New London --

MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't seen anything on it. Jim, go ahead.

Q You didn't see anything on it? You'd like to evade this one, wouldn't you.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I haven't seen anything on it, Les. I like to see reports before I comment on it.


Q No, it's the other ones he's trying to evade.


Q -- on why you can't answer Ed's question about whether -- generally speaking, whether the administration has a credibility problem. I think a lot of people are tuning in, wondering, can we trust what this White House says, can we trust what Scott McClellan says.

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes.

Q I'm not talking about the case. Can you just address -- do you feel like there's a credibility problem?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think you all in this room know me very well. And you know the type of person that I am. You, and many others in this room, have dealt with me for quite some time. The President is a very straightforward and plainspoken person, and I'm someone who believes in dealing in a very straightforward way with you all, as well, and that's what I've worked to do.

Go ahead, Carl."

NYTimes tastes blood

With one of their journalists in jail protecting a White House Senior Administration official who broke the law to get political revenge, I think the NYTimes is tasting a bit of blood. I suspect that, unlike past situations, they aren't going to give the WHouse a pass on this one. And here, today, a the NYTimes reports that a journalist twice asked Bush if he was going to fire Rove, during a photo op. Bush sat in stony silence.

Krugman endorses The Onion's prophetic wisdom

In Krugman's article today, he says that no one said it better than The Onion on Jan 18, 2001: Un-Spin the Budget - New York Times: "'We must squander our nation's hard-won budget surplus on tax breaks for the wealthiest 15 percent,'" "And, on the foreign front, we must find an enemy and defeat it."

Mr. Cooper, Karl Rove on Your Cellphone?

Not quite. NYTimes reports how Matt Cooper got the specific waiver from his source -- now known to be Karl Rove -- which permit him to completely reveal their conversation. No, Karl Rove didn't call Matt Cooper on his cell phone and say, "Gosh, Matt, this is silly. You go ahead and testify, I release you from your pledge of confidentiality to me."

Seems Matt Cooper's lawyer read the Wall Street Journal that morning, and Rove's lawyer was quoted as saying "If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source, it's not Karl he's protecting." And that was it. Cooper and his lawyer took that to mean that Karl Rove had released him from confidentiality.

Of course, the same release should also apply to Judith Miller, you'd think. Miller didn't see it that way.

Senate Back In Session; Bolton Still Unemployed

Yesterday, July 8th, marked the end of
the US Senate's July 4th recess, the first recess following the Democrats' successful filibuster of John Bolton's nomination to the UN. The recess offered Bush an opportunity to slip Bolton in, using the constitutionally protected "recess appointment" -- where Bush can place someone in office if the opening happens while the Senate is in recess, thus sidestepping their "Advise and Consent Power". While the wording of the constitution there implies that the appointment can only be made if the vacancy occurs while the Senate is not in session, this apparently has always been interpreted by both the Seante and the President to apply to any nomination which is open at all during a Senate recess -- thus, giving the President some leeway in forcing an appointment through. The appointment is effective only until the next elected congress takes their positions (January 2007 for the present group), so Bolton would have to stand down with a year to go in the Bush Presidency -- but, nonetheless, that's a good 1.5 years of uninterrupted Bolton in the UN, instead of 2.5 years. Like he couldn't get done in 1.5 years what he wants to do in 2.5?

But, Bush didn't do it. He's let Bolton's nomination languish, even through a recess. So what's the plan here, fellas? We going to put someone in at the UN, or are we going to let this nomination fiasco hang out? Seems to me keeping the wound festering only hurts the Bushies, and helps the Dems -- a constant reminder of Bush's arrogance of position, and his poor judgement in picking subordinates.

Judith Miller Stupidly Seeks Martyrdom

What the heck? Matthew Cooper says his source contacted him today and released him from his bond to keep the source confidential; so, Cooper's talking.

Judith Miller of the NYTimes is NOT talking, and is now in jail. Which means either her source is a different one from Cooper's (and so didn't release her, too), or she's just sitting in prison seeking journalistic martyrdom.

Whatever. Journalists who are told by a judge that the leak promoted no national benefit should be compelled legally to talk; and other journalists should recognize that this is not a violation of professional ethics. Keeping confidential the identity of a US government employee who uses the journalist to make public damaging information about a private citizen with the exclusive intent of punishing the citizen serves no ethical purpose. Journalists who do this consent to being weapons of political warfare, and no more. That's not good for the Republic.

Bush daughter Barbara is said to "volunteer" in S. Africa

She's been there six weeks. But, funny thing, none of the 20 hospital employees interviewed had seen her. And the Nurse's Supervisor at the children's burn unit where it's said she works, says she might have been there, but couldn't be certain, because none of the volunteers ever sign in.

Is little Barbara following in her father's "Alabama National Guard" footsteps? US Army no longer good enough to go AWOL with, she had to do it to a children's burn unit in South Africa?

Rove Is The Plame Leaker

Daily Kos gives the transcript for the McLaughlin Group; Lawrence O'Donell revealed that the Time Magazine papers, turned over to the Grand Jury, finger Karl Rove.

Bush's Supreme Court Candidate: John Ashcroft

Of course, Bush hasn't announced the candidate yet. This is just my flier.

Any why wouldn't W. appoint him?


He's got bona fide conservative credentials. Is known to be deeply religious. Has a JD from Chicago (BS from Yale, '64), was Governor of Missouri for 8 years, US Senator from Missouri, and has served as Attorney General.

Just my flier.

Does O'Conner's Resignation Require A Change In Bush's Tactics

As a swing vote on the court, O'Conner's resignation represents an opportunity to take additional ground in the important conservative battles.


Had Rehnquist retired (and he may yet), the opportunity was to lose a conservative vote on the court.

Paul Krugman gets off a great line

Krugman's OpEd: "After all, you wage war with the president you have, not the president you want."

Architecture and Freedom

The only art which matters today is architecture -- specifically, public architecture. Painting, drawing, scuplture -- all have long since moved past people. But great architecture is still at a level which can be appreciated by the most well informed and the least well informed. It's an expensive form, though, which is why the most interesting work comes from where the deep pockets are.

Watching what has been happening with the Freedom Tower -- the replacement structure for the World Trade Center -- exceeds in interest any spectator sport. Which is why the NYTimes archetecture critic's appraisal of the most recent incarnation is perhaps the most important one yet written about any modern building.: "What the tower evokes, by comparison, are ancient obelisks, blown up to a preposterous scale and clad in heavy sheaths of reinforced glass - an ideal symbol for an empire enthralled with its own power."

Read the article and look at the drawings. How anyone could see this building as anything other than a threatening missile of power, I do not know.

The Jailing of Judith Miller - New York Times

Editors:


Re: “The Jailing of Judith Miller” (by William Safire, June 29 2005, OpEd).



Safire makes clear that journalists’ privilege is in conflict with citizens’ rights. An absolute privilege for journalistic sources is a weapon with which vindictive government officials would victimize citizens who oppose it. Citizens are defenseless against such abuses.

A nuanced ethical standard is required, promulgated and policed by a national journalist organization. Journalists should protect sources whose leaks promote a public good – as found by a judge -- and be required to expose those whose leaks do not. This would put prospective leakers on notice that if their leaks serve no public good, they will be exposed by the journalist, backed by the journalists’ national organization. If journalists don’t produce this standard themselves, we must ask courts to do it in our defense. Thankfully, they are.

Why Liberals Should Be Thrilled That Judith Miller Is Going To Prison

She was told by two Senior Administration Officials that Judith Plame is a CIA operative -- an act which is a violation of Federal Law (for the officials).
As a NYTimes reporter

(here's today's OpEd where they hold forth), she believes -- as do many journalists -- that all her conversations deserve absolute protection. The Supreme Court found this week that absolute protection for the sources of journalists does not exist in the Constitution.

We liberals should get down on our knees and thank God that protection does not exist. If it did, it would be a "nuclear weapon" by which angry and vindictive government officials would exact revenge on individual American Citizens. And get away with it. Here's how that would work.

The single largest steward of information about individuals is the United States Government. They collect all our financial data, our criminal records, our history; they write down the speculation of informants to the FBI, our secret testimonies regarding Supreme Court nominees (hello, Anita Hill).

If Miller's Right existed, any time someone in the government got a personal vendetta against you, they would pick up a phone, call a journalist, and, boom, now your private information is public, possilby ruining your reputation, possibly making it impossible for you to do business, or function in society. It might even -- as it did in Plame's case -- endanger the lives of any friend she has in Africa, where she operated, and where despotic murderous governments tend to kill opponents who talk to the CIA. It's a weapon which is unilaterally held by US Government officials, for which there is no counter-weapon.

The important difference between Miller's Leak and leaks which should -- must -- be protected, is that Miller's leak served no useful social or national purpose, at all. It did not promote common defense, general welfare, blessings of liberty et al. It was a vindictive attempt by US Government officials to punish a citizen for standing up against it. There is no defense against such a weapon; no review of it in the courts before it happens.

1 year along: Executive continues to flaunt Supreme Court Ruling

One year ago today, the Supreme Court ruled that the 500 prisoners held in Gitmo have a right to a habeous corpus review in Federal Courts.

Since then, 200 appeals for habeous corpus have been filed.

The number of these which have been heard: zero.

Why? Because the Justice department has been arguing in front of Federal Judges that, sure, the prisoners may have a right to a hearing under the Supreme Court ruling, but they have no other constitutional rights. Like, for a judge. Review of evidence. Jury of peers. Anything. At all. Basically, the prisoners have a right to have a hearing in an empty federal courtroom, according to the Justice Department.

This is overstepping by the Executive. Seeing that the Executive Branch already controls the Congress, it's no wonder, that Rehnquist -- who concurred with O'Conner and Stevens, both mentioned as possible retirees this year -- is not in a hurry to retire, giving Bush the opportunity to appoint, say, John Bolton's cranky little sister to the Bench.

Bob's Advance Copy of Bush's Speech Tonight

Bush has to give a speech to bring people back onto his side on the Iraq war. When he's running a political campaign, he wins support by stealing his opponent's issues; he did this in South Carolina against McCain, for example.

So what can he say now? Here's the draft of the speech I submitted to him yesterday, I figure he could brush it up with a few jokes (see Derek's post, below) and it's good to go.


(ON)

My fellow Americans: Thirty months ago, the United States, acting under direction of the United Nations Security Council blah blah blah blah blah.

Let's skip all that. You know it. What I really want to tell you is, our boys are over there getting shot up. And we've already done our job. And it's unnecessary. I'm talking to you tonight about how I'm going to fix it.

We invaded the country, when liberals were saying that street warfare would be bloody -- and it wasn't. We deposed a ruthless, murderous dictator, and handed him over to his people to be brought to trial for war crimes. We handed sovereignty to an established interim government, supervised the constitutional writing process, held successful elections, and started to help train the new Iraqi army.

You folks can read. The Department of Defense estimated in August 2004 that there were 5,000 insurgents in Iraq; today, that estimate stands at 25,000. Last year in June, fewer than 30 people were killed in suicide bombings. This June, already hundreds of people have been killed in suicide bombings. And the quality of life in Iraq is estimated by the United Nations to be worse now than it was before we invaded. Any way you slice it, things are getting worse.

There's a good reason for it. As we Americans know, any time you put someone in the classroom and say "This guy's the teacher; he's in charge", nobody else in the room will step up to take any responsibility. If someone starts suicide bombing, the rest of the room says "Hey, I don't need to do nothing -- that teacher's going to take care of it." If bad people start shouting "FIRE FIRE FIRE" and freaking everyone out, who's supposed to shush 'em? Teacher. We've all seen this happen.

Nobody will step forward, to help the teacher out -- unless they're the "teacher's pet" type, and nobody else in the room likes a teacher's pet. The problem we have in Iraq is that we're The Teach, and we're trying to find a bunch of teacher's pets to take over the classroom for when we're gone. And you know darn well what happens when the teacher leaves and the teacher's pet is in charge: bedlam.

As long as we're there, no credible Iraqi leaders will step forward to lead the country. Why would they? It'd make them the teacher's pet. Iraqis are being killed left and right for being the teacher's pet. Why, just today, the oldest member of the Iraqi Interim Government was killed in a suicide bombing.

The choice is clear: we should leave, soon. I've authorized troop redployments, which will remove all 150,000 US personnel by December 10, 2005. This means, if any of you have children in Iraq, I'm going to be doing my best to have them home for the Holidays.

Good night, and God Bless America.

Supreme court justice to lose house in case of irony vs. Souter?

In a bid to open a hotel aptly named "The Lost Liberty Hotel", featuring a "Just Desserts" cafe, Logan Darrow Clements of Freestar Media, LLC has filed a request in the Towne of Weare to use emminent domain to take Souter's home.

From the article:
Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

Not only is this not a joke, there are only 5 people on the Board of Selectmen in the town. Only 3 have to agree to take away Souter's home.

What Do These Have in Common?

What do these four have in common: John Walton, John F. Kennedy Jr., John Denver, and John Kerry?

All four are named John, and all four crashed and burned.

Dubyah's Big Night

This is looking like it will be a pretty important speech for our President. The polls show his approval ratings plummeting - as Josh Marshall puts it, looking at his 31% approval rating on Social Security: "What [have been] the lowest ratings for a president... on any significant issue? How much lower than thirty percent does it go?"

Particularly relevant to tonight's address, he's running at 40% approval and 58% disapproval for his handling of the war in Iraq. So given the stakes, I figure the President will want to take the edge off the occasion with some light-hearted humor, and I suggest we 13D denizens do our part to help him out. Here are my suggestions:

• Well, the price of oil hit $60 a barrel yesterday. See? It's true! I really didn't invade Iraq for the oil.
• You may be concerned, as I have been, about the situation in Iraq. Some say that, with the progress we've made, the Iraqi insurgency is in its final days. Others say that, given its current strength, it could go on for a dozen years or more. And that's just two of the opinions I get from my Cabinet!
• The goal of a peaceful and democratic Iraq is too important for us not to stay the course there, maintaining - and increasing - our military superiority on the ground. Therefore, I will be asking Congress this week to institute a draft of all able-bodied young citizens, so that we may achieve this goal in a manner that is fair to all, with no class distinctions to sully the honor of those armed men and women who make the final sacrifice for their country. Just kidding!

Anyone else care to assist our President in his time of need?

Rehnquist does not retire

The Supreme Court ended its session today, and neither Rehnquist announced a retirement. Of course, anyone can retire at any time, but it has been traditional to announce an anticipated retirement at the end of the June session.

Whoo hoooo!!!!

Supreme Court: Judith Miller Going To Jail, Robert Novak Next!

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal in C.I.A. Leak Case by Journalists. The Supremes found no absolute right to protect sources. This means that now, the prosecurter in the Valerie Plame case can go directly after Robert Novak and, if he doesn't turn, he can go to jail.

I'm guessing Novak isn't as principled as Judith Miller is, and would rather flip on his White House buddies than go to jail.

The Priest Shouts: "Religion be Damned! This is a Serious Business!"

When a free-market economist like Paul Krugman advises the US to block the Chinese bid to buy UNOCAL, you should freak out.

Krugman points out that China, with its newfound wealth and US Bond IOUs, is now buying American companies. However, unlike its predecessor in the area (Japan), it's not buying companies at inflated rates, and targeted for prestige purposes (MGM, Rockefeller Center) -- that is, it's not making dumb investments. It's shrewdly buying companies to forward its manufacturing and global geopolitical position (Maytag; and an Oil company).

Also, it's worth noting that when Japan bought, it was actually Japanese private citizens. Here, the companies doing the buying are owned by the Chinese government. It's the Chinese government which will own the now American companies.

So, what we're seeing here is, the Chinese government is using the US Debt to buy US Companies, to forward their manufacturing and geopolitical position. This is actually unprecedented in history. No single entity -- and certainly, no government -- has ever entered the marketplace with the singular political will and growing economic influence that China has, and will have, for the next decades.

Krugman makes a purely political, non-economically motivated recommendation: block the sale of UNOCAL. Clearly, he feels that selling our historical dominance of energy-resource companies to China will place us at such a heavy political disadvantage, that politics is the more important consideration than free-market economics.

And that should freak you out. It's a bit like a priest suddenly shouting "Religion be damned! This is a serious business, no place for religion!"

What Krugman is saying is happening is exactly what anyone who can add sees as becoming the dominant world political trend: China, with a billion people, a rising economy and single-party dictatorship which owns all major Chinese companies, is rising, and its political and economic interests are beginning to brush up against those of the United States. As China's economy continues to grow exponentially, the brushes will grow, too.

The major question for the US is: will we permit what is, in effect, growing influence on the world economy by the Chinese government, or will we require the Chinese government to divest itself of companies which wish to grow by acquiring US assets -- in effect, privatising the Chinese economy. Expect the Chinese government to say "we don't have to privatise", so that it retains control of these assets -- and political control of its citizens, while effecting a larger international political control through its new acquisitions, rivalling that of the US economy (itself entirely private); and the US government to say, "If you don't privitise your companies, then we would be permitting the Chinese government to take control of the world economy, and we cannot permit a single government to control the world economy." This will play out first in the World Trade Organization, and then, when the Chinese government refuses to divest -- which they will -- it will play out in fora with many fewer ground rules for behavior than the WTO has.

Religion be damned, this is a serious business.

Canada About To Adopt Same-Sex Marriage Nationwide

It's already legal in Quebec. But the Supreme Court here ruled last year that it should be passed nationwide. And, within the next few weeks, the paraliment will have done so. National Post Article.

What's going on in Iran?

For many years the elected part of Iran's government was dominated by reformist politicians leading us to believe that the hard-line policies of the Islamic revolution were unpopular. But then, in the last few years, the unelected clerics decided that the reformist politicians would be disqualified from elections. However, Iran recently held an election which included candidates from various wavelengths in the political spectrum, including a reformist candidate or two. The result of this election was a victory for the most hard-line candidate. There have been reports of fraud but the news I've heard says any fraud doesn't appear to widespread and that, overall, the results should be considered valid. So what is does the mood of the Iranian electorate? Has it changed? If so, why? If anything, I would have expected some kind of backlash against the hard-liners for disqualifying the popular reformist politicians. None of the media I have been paying attention to has made any sense of all this to me yet.

For Those of Us Who've Left LA

Everyone leaves LA, sooner or later, sometimes for good, others merely permanently. I've had my own forth and back, from 86-90 and again 97-2003. Steve was there in the 90s. Robin was there very young. Connie still comes back to her childhood home, if only to abandon baggage with friends while visiting the parents across town. And now, Derek and Erica are pulling stakes July 14 and moving to State College, PA, where both will hold forth a few times weekly to Nittany underclassmen. Patrick holds the last remaining vacant guest room in the city for us -- hold on Patrick!

And for those of us who are still on the sugar rush, here's NYTimes article on the KCRW show Morning Morning Becomes Eclectic. It's one of thee few shows KCRW doesn't podcast, but you can pick up the iTunes stream here if you can tune in 9-12am Pacific time.

Blair's son to intern with U.S. Republicans

I'm not sure what this means, but it is unusual to intern with a political party from another country.

Arianna Huffington Reports Cheney Checked into Vail Cardiac Unit Under False Name

Seems this happened yesterday. Apparently he's out now.

Iran's New Hardline President a "Uniter" not a Divider

Winner in Iran Calls for Unity. He'd like Iranians to forget all their rivalries and turn them into friendships.

Something Monday This Way Comes

Monday's the last session before 2 months of vacation for the Supreme Court. On Monday: (1) they'll announce if they will hear the appeal of Judith Schmidt and Tim Matthews, on whether they have to serve jail time for contempt, for refusing to reveal their source in the Valarie Plame Scandal. If the lower-court decision is let to stand, off to jail they go -- and watch for the Federal Prosecutor to go after Robert Novak next. (2) Rehnquist might announce a retirement (I hope not).

Supreme's on Monday.

Italian Court Calls "Extraordinary Rendition" Ordinary Kidnapping

and so ordered the arrest of 13 Americans, all affiliated with the US Consulate in Milan, claiming they are CIA operatives. Seems the court believes they were involved in the kidnapping of an Egyptian imam off the streets in Milan, and had him sent to Egypt where, the imam's family says, he is being tortured.

Extraordinary Rendition is the US policy of sending terrorism suspects to other countries to be interrogated.

Administration Sends Mixed Messages

Look folks - this is pretty simple. Either the the Iraq insurgency is in its last throes, as the Vice President says, and we can plan to start bringing the troops home soon; or it's going to be necessary to stay the course in Iraq for the next two years - and I think we can assume that "no timetable" for withdrawal means at least two years at current troop levels - because of the strength of the resistance.

Unless the point of keeping our troops in Iraq indefinitely is to give them time enough to savor the wonders of Mesopotamian civilization past & present, you just can't have it both ways. Will someone please press the White House on this point?

Rumsfeld to Senators: Get Ready To Start the Draft, or Impeach the President

Senators asked Rumsfeld on Thursday for a timetable for leaving Iraq; Rumsfeld responded that doing so would "throw terrorists a lifeline", telling them when they have to hold out until.

This is bad strategy and it is bad policy.

Because, if you've been reading the news, you'd know that recruitment targets for the armed forces have been missed again and again the first half of this year. The Senators want to know: is the situation so bad in Iraq that we going to have to start drafting people? By saying "we are there forever", Rumsfeld is telling the Senators that we are either going to be undermanned in Iraq within a year -- making impossible for us to put down the insurgency -- , or that the draft is going to start.

Will the US public face a draft to fight the insurgency in Iraq, in a war that 60% of the public now believes President Bush and Company deliberately misled us into, using lies? No.

So, Rumsfeld's answer to the Senators -- sorry, no timeline -- means our Iraq policy is adrift, and we will either be drafting boys (and girls!) to fight and die in a war we were misled into, or we will simply see the quagmire deepen.

In response, Sen Kennedy, exasperated, asked Rumsfeld, given all your failures, isn't it time for you to resign? Rumsfeld responded, exasperated, "I've offered my resignation to the President twice." The implication is clear -- if we want out of this quagmire, we have to remove President Bush. So, what do you do to a President who willfully lied to the people to bring us into a needless war? That sounds impeachable.

US Has "Torture Doctors" At Gitmo

In violation of professional ethics no less -- if you take the "first, do no harm" oath seriously. So, now we keep on staff medical professionals who design torture techniques. Our very own torture doctors. Here's the article.

The Difference Between Scientists and Gooney Birds

The Planetary Society, a private group in the US interested in interplanetary travel, attempted to put up a solar sail this week, on a Russian Cosmos 1 rocket, which is launched from a submarine. The Russians announced, soon after launch time, that the rocket launch had taken place, but ultimately failed, due to unknown causes, and the probe had not reached orbit. Nonetheless, "scientists" at the Planetary Society said they believed they had detected signals from the $4 million spacecraft and that it was in orbit.

So, I'm sure it came as a shock to them when, several hours later, the Russian Space Agency announced that the cause of the failure was that the booster exploded 83 seconds after launch, and that the probe got no where near its orbit. This leaves the only possibilities for the Planetary Society's "signals" being either they were hearing the ghost of the obliterated probe, or that they themselves are completely bonkers, hearing "signals" where there are none.

Do space probes have a soul?

Will Bush Wimp Out?

Now that Bush has definitely lostthe fight to pass Bolton through the Senate, will he wimp out?

Presidents who don't have the power to do what they want, or the political skill to convince others to work with them on things they want to accomplish, hide behind infrequently used powers. Bush just may wimp out, and make a recess appointment of John Bolton.

By performing the recess appointment, Bush might as well put on a sandwich board which announces, "I am worthless and weak. I can't even get a nominee to the United Nations -- a body which I consider irrelevant except as an obstruction -- through the Senate. My boy Bill Frist, who's supposed to be the number one muther fucker in charge over there, can't keep his guys in line, and at a 40% approval rating, neither can I. Just ignore me." Except that you can't fit that all on one sandwich board.

So instead, maybe he'll just perform the recess appointment during the July 4th weekend. So that we all know. That he's a wimp.

Radioactive Tom Cruise

So, just heard: after the $49M opening of BATMAN BEGINS, Warner Bros. is looking to remake the other films, staring Christian Bale.

And Katie Holmes? They're looking to replace her with "a better actress".

ooof.

Recess Appointment for Bolton to the UN? Challenge Recess Appointments!

It would let him serve as US Ambassador through January 2007. Next recess is for the July 4 weekend, and then the traditional "Holy Mother! It's Humid!" August recess. Dems are demanding Bolton's past requests for classified information, to determine how responsible his handling of such are, and Rice and Bush have refused to hand them over, several times.

If Bush goes to a recess appointment, the Democrats should challenge the Presidential recess appointment power. This power is granted in Article 1 section 2 of the Constitution:

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.

This is interpreted as meaning the President may appoint someone to an office without Senate's consent during a Senate recess. However, that's not how I read it. It reads pretty clearly to me that the appointment may happen if the vacancy occurs ("happen") during the recess -- that is, if the Senate were in recess, the UN Ambassador dies, the President has the power to immediately fill the seat. But that's not how it's been interpreted historically. It has been interpreted to mean that if the Senate is in recess ,the president may fill any vacancy which normally would require their advice and consent, regardless of when that vacancy happened.

Seems wrong to me. Seems like this would be a good time to ask the courts to clear up the matter. I'm sure strict constuctionists like Scalia and Thomas would read it the way I do.

7:14pm Update: Bolton nomination is stopped again in the Senate. DEms filibustered it.

Democrat #2 Throws Hat into 2008 Ring: Senator Joe Biden

Last week it was Virginia Governor Jack Warner. Now we have Senator Joe Biden (Delaware) is in. Remember back the year Gary Hart ran, Biden was in it then, but a scandal came out because he had cribbed some speaches from other historical people's speeches, and even, apparently, some of his student-day essays.

Seems quaint in a time when we elect a president who drunkenly plowed his car into a tree, and was all coked up in Alabama instead of working for the National Guard, and the press dismisses it all as childhood excess.

Bush: Like a Rock

Neal Stephenson Op-Ed

Neal Stephenson chimes in to the Star Wars discussion today... with an NYT Op-Ed.

And, I might add, quite a geeky one.

A Simple Solution for Bush

John Bolton is a contentious appointment for the UN Ambassadorship.

What can Bush do? He wants his man there.

Answer: tell Congress that if they don't approve Bolton to the UN Ambassadorship, he'll appoint him to be Chair of the Federal Reserve when Greenspan retires next year.

That'll focus a few minds.

Iraq Strategy

Three years after giving the whole enterprise his blessing ("a war of choice, but a good one")...

30 months after explaining "The Pottery Barn Rule" to us...

27 months after the invasion...

25 months after "the end of major combat operations"...

18 months after ditching town to research & write a national bestseller on a different subject entirely...

8 months after our elections...

5 months after their elections...

Thomas Friedman is back with a question about Iraq that he wants - nay, demands - be answered - What is our strategy?

It's a good question! My only objection is to its timing.

I Now Pronounce You, Seargent and Warrant Officer

Let's say that you lived in a country where gay people served openly in the military. Let's say also that you lived in a country where gay people get married. Eventually,
there would be a gay wedding between two military men.

Kissinger on China

When Henry Kissinger has something to say about China, we should probably lend an ear.

Light in the loafers?

It occured to me that a few weeks ago, the religious right was going after SpongeBob SquarePants because he appeared to be gay. SpongeBob's gayness could be debated, but they went after him anyway.

So where was the attack on the obvious icon? C-3PO is about as gay as they come, but the right won't go after him. Why? Is it because the gender of his companion R2-D2 isn't clear? Have you ever seen 3PO's package? It's ginormous!

Pretend you're in the Senate, and discuss.

Ritual And Cats

This is not about bizarre Satanist rituals of animal sacrifice, but it is about something just as curious: rituals performed by animals.

The cat I'm sitting has an odd habit: prior to drinking, he moves his dish across the floor. The water splashes a little, and then he drinks. I've talked with other cat owners, and this is common.

What the heck is up with that? The cat's owner has a drinking fountain (but not enough time to bring it over with the cat on his rush to the airport), which usually keeps the water moving. The owner (and the above website) claims that cats like moving water. In nature, he says, moving water is in a river, which is healthy to drink, while stagnant water is often unhealthy. The cat is led by evolutionary self-preservation to prefer moving water.

Fine, so buy a fountain, the water moves and the cat is happy to find moving water. But why the high holy heck would a cat move the water himself before drinking it? It doesn't improve his health at all, whether he does this in my kitchen or in the Serengeti. If the point of drinking moving water is to select healthy water, it doesn't make the water in his dish any healthier to shove his bowl across my floor.

About the only reasonable, if anthropomorphic, argument I can think of is that the cat is engaging in a pre-meal ritual. In this ritual, Max has to make the water physicallly ripple prior to drinking it. He has no idea why this is, but it must be done to sate his evolutionarily self-preservational psyche.

Alternatively, cats have bad eyesight, can't see the clear liquid in the bowl, and so splashes it about to see if it's there. However, he could just stick his face in, and find out THAT way, which seems a simpler, and so more likely approach.

By moving its own water prior to drinking it might seem like the cat is engaging in a pre-drinking ritual -- a useless yet meaningful activity.

I'm just concerned that I'm going to come home one night, and find Max set up burning candles on a sheet-covered altar, draped in a gold embroidered robe and red beanie, incense drifting, arms raised heavens-ward before scarfing his cat chow.

So, now I'm curious to see if Paul Krugman writes about *this* this week.

White House Council of Economic Advisors Has Zero Members

Today, its Chairman stepped down, leaving the council with exactly zero members.

Bush has nominated a new chair to the Senate. He's been approved by the Banking Committee but has to be approved by the full Senate.

So today -- rather symbollicaly, don't you think -- the White House's Council of Economic Advisors has zero members.

Back to the Days of the Robber Baron Monopolists

Today, top news stories include the fact that the US Justicie department decided to drop that $130B judgement to zilch. Paul Krugman writes that Bush Administration policies have all been directed back to turning our country away from one with a social safety net and a robust middle class to one with a few very, very rich and powerful people, and the rest poor people.

So, which group are you intending to belong to?

First Dem Presidential Runner -- Virginia Gov. Mark Warner

The race begins. Speaking of which, anybody else see Colin Powell on The Daily Show last night? Just two days after Newt Gingerich. Neither of them declared.

New Slant on Mortgage Spam

One of the odd aspects of buying a first house in this Age of the Internet is that it gives you a whole new perspective on the vast "mortgage loan application" category of spam. For example, here is the actual text of an email I received from our real-life lender last week:

Subject: WOOO HOOOO!!!
The rates are in for today!!!!! 5.125% NO POINTS and NO ORIGINATION!!!!! Betcha I beat whoever the other bank is!

And you know - out of sheer habit I nearly deleted it...

Vaccine for Marburg, Ebola

Canadian researchers report discovering a vaccine which is 100% effective against Marburg and Ebola in monkeys.

Who Said Being A Big 'Ol Liar Can't Get You Ahead In Life?

Katherine Harris to Run for Senate in 2006.

North Korea Says It Is Open to Resuming Six-Party Negotiations, Hopes the US will Provide Tasty Snacks

They're ready again. And they don't want to make a nuisance of themselves -- but could the US bring tasty snacks, like last time? Maybe some finger sandwiches? And, hey, since they'll be in town, maybe Bush could throw a Texas BBQ! Some ribs, and creamy potato salad, with some of Laura's Hot Apple Pie that Tony Blair goes on and on about!

North Korea promises to bring a dip.

And this time, not Kim Jong-Il! (Good joke last time, though! Ha ha!)

Breaking!

The New York Times Editorial Board has determined that America's Music industry is more interested in churning out money-making blockbusters than how the music actually sounds!

Shocked! Gambling! Shocked!

Serra Great

An exhibit by Richard Serra, which was at the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Arts a few years ago, has made its way to the Guggenheim Bilbao. At least one critic is now calling it one of the greatest works of art of the past 50 years.

We know, of course, that this critic is not a Caltech student, since every Caltech student knows how a Serra sculpture interrupts a good frisbee lawn.

Oh, but I'm not bitter.

Bush's War on the Middle Class

Bob makes an excellent point in the post below. Just to drive the point home, you may wish to peruse this article in the NYT today about changes the Department of Education has made to the college financial aid formula since 2000.

According to the article, two primary changes are working together to drive up the size of the annual parental contribution by thousands of dollars for median income families:

1. The Pell Grant system has substantially reduced its deduction for state income taxes, as an explicit cost-cutting measure;
2. The DOE has significantly reduced its long-term inflation forecast from years past.

The impact of the latter change is subtle but easy to understand: when inflation is lower, families need to save less for retirement, so they can "afford" to spend more sending their kids to college.

Note the coincidences here (because in politics, coincidences are about as likely as the tooth fairy): (1) States with higher income tax are inevitably blue states; and (2) The change in the inflation forecast, just like the Pell Grant rules revision, serves to decrease government spending - useful in these times of roaring budget deficits.

Putting it all together: Bush is soaking the middle class (esp. those in Blue States) in order to make up for a budget that has been busted by income and estate tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%.

The Winner Take All Society

I hope you've been following the NYTimes is running a series on Class Matters in America.

This comes against the backdrop of Bush's re-shuffling of the social contract, where government's interaction with the wealthy favors them much more, and helps to preserve their wealth and keep it over generations. Bush has decreased taxes for the wealthy, such that now, everyone paying over $10M pays a lower *fraction* of their indcome in taxes than those at $100K (a regressive tax, people). And, by doing away with estate taxes, wealth will now be inherited, meaning future generations need worry less about meritocracy -- a return to demands for the Gentleman's Cs in classes at Yale.

Since World War II, the US has given a very nice deal to the working class and the middle class -- indeed, the middle class has dominated society and politics for half a century. To the extent that the wealthy determine the direction of politics, you can see that, now that the Cold War is over, the need for all those working people is somewhat diminished. Thus, the social contract which offered respect to these classes is going to be adjusted. This is to say, the heyday of the middle and working class is over. Now is the time to be rich -- and not just a little rich, but extremely rich. Welcome to the age of hegemony, where the winners dominate and rule over those weak enough to be dominated and ruled.

Thus, the political trends favoring the wealthy established under Bush will continue, and deepen. And why wouldn't they? The very words "class warfare", thrown about by Republicans at any Democrat who suggests that a regressive tax systsem is unfair, sting sufficiently to discredit the argument, regardless of the merits. Within our own generation, it will be much harder to retire as a member of the middle class, and the middle class will be leaving much less to their children.

Why I Think Rehnquist Will Not Retire

In a somewhat vulgar display, public discusions over who might step onto the Supreme Court have begun. Chief Justice Renquist, with cancer, is thought likely to announce his retirement at the end of this session, in a few weeks.

Rehnquist voted, in what many consider to be a jurisprudentially dubious decision, to effect Bush's win in 2000. Subsequently, some think him a Republican partisan.

However, I think Rehnquist, as Chief Justice, thinks historically about the importance of checks and balances. He sees the archly powerful executive under Bush, and how the Senate has been cowed into being his right hand through the very personally weak Majority Leader Bill Frist -- who owes his political life to Bush. And, he sees that when the court hands down decisions, like the one last summer, that the detainees at Guantanamo Bay have rights of appeal in Federal Courts, the Executive Branch just plain ignores them, as it has been doing for the Gitmo decision all this year, playing it off in courts as if the Supreme Court decision did not exist.

Even if he is a partisan, he likely guards the separation of powers, and its checks and balances very closely. Seeing the Bushies 2 for 3 probably makes him worry about their aggressive Congressional posturing to go for 3 for 3.

So, I think Rehnquist will do a gut check, and ask himself -- can I keep doing this for 3 more years?

Bolton Demanded Illegal Firing of Iraq Weapons Inspector in pre-war 2002

Apparently, Bush's nominee for ambassador to the UN John Bolton orchestrated the firing of a UN civil servant chemical weapons inspector, because the inspector was trying to send UN weapons inspectors to Baghdad, which might have defused the pre-Iraq war crisis and demonstrated what the world now knows to be fact: there were no WMD in Iraq. Oh, and the UN declared the unusual firing unlawful.

This is a man with no sense, who acts in contempt of democratic rules. He's anti-democratic.

The End Of The Free Credit Report?

Remember how excited we all were when Congress passed a law requiring Equifax, Experian and Trans Union to provide a free credit report to all consumers who request one, once yearly? The FTC required they set up
a website

www.annualcreditreport.com where they would accept those requests. Well, go to that link now, and it's a dead link. The FTC thinks that link should be live and functioning. Of course, maybe you could call the number the FTC gives which goes to the same group: 877-322-8228, and sure enough, a computer recording answers. They give you two options: If you are calling from your home phone, press 1; if you are calling from another phone, press 2. So, I pressed 1 (calling from my home phone), and the response "Thank you for calling Annual Credit Report. Goodbye." and they hung up. So I called back, and pressed 2. They ask me to enter my home phone number (which I did) and the response was "Thank you for calling Annual Credit Report. Goodbye." and they hung up.

So, it looks like the credit reporting companies have decided not to provide that service anymore.

Isn't that illegal?

Mahnamahna

For Sesame Street Lovers of a Certain age: Mahnamahna

Bill Clinton Wants to Lead, Again.

The idea makes me breathless: He wants to be Secretary-General of the United Nations.

The very suggestion makes stark the contrast with Bush's UN ambassador nominee John Bolton. Are Bill Clinton and John Bolton even the same species?

Buchanan: Felt, as "Deep Throat", is a traitor

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.