Bob, getting the phonecalls again

Zellweger has split after a five month stint with her husband.

Her reason for splitting? Bob's sexiness, and, I quote: "I was a fool for leaving him."

George Bush Needs a Bathroom Break

At least, according to this note he wrote to Condi during a Security Council Meeting today.

And There It Goes

Starting next Monday, the NYTimes OpEds will be access restricted. The yearly fee is $50 (which includes other services as well).

So the question is -- how long until I can't stand not reading Paul Krugman again?

Wha? This Doesn't Make Any Sense

Less than 2 weeks after President Bush praized Mike Brown, head of FEMA, with "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job", regarding his response to the Katrina disaster -- Brown first was relieved of all duties regarding Katrina, and now he's resigned.

So what are we to conclude from this? That Bush is a big ol' liar? That he can't tell the difference between a horrible job over which one should (and did) resign, and a "heck of a job?"

Is it really a good idea to have a President who makes statements which everyone knows is a complete lie, including himself?

The Post is a Stooge

Dear Washington Post Ombudsman,

In Howard Kurtz's column today, we see Post National Editor Michael Abramowitz scrambling to apologize for printing, unchallenged, a claim by an anonymous Administration official that a state of emergency was not declared in Louisiana until after September 3. Since Gov. Blanco declared just such a state on Friday, August 26 - more than a week before the Post story - this was a shockingly false claim to appear in the Posts' pages.

The story's co-writer, Spencer Hsu, attempts to explain away this deception by saying:

We don't blow sources, period, especially if we don't have reason to believe the source in this case actually lied deliberately.

Two questions about this quote:

1. Is it true that Mr. Hsu would protect his dissembling source, even if he did believe that his source had "lied deliberately" to make a stooge of the Post? Is this official Washington Post policy?
2. If Mr. Hsu does not believe that his source "lied deliberately", then exactly how does he think the source came to state this falsehood? Since the claim itself is so egregiously wrong, there was obviously a very deliberate lie planted by someone somewhere along the line - either by the source itself or by a trusted informant of the source. In other words, someone upstream from the Washington Post lied deliberately either about: (a) The date when a state of emergency was declared in Louisiana; or (b) The source's state of knowledge regarding when, exactly, a state of emergency had been declared in Louisiana. Does Mr. Hsu mean to claim that the second case is more forgivable than the first? Is this, also, official Washington Post policy?

Thank you very much for your time.

Derek Fox

Robin in the Room

I'd like to point out that Bob is now the Robin in the room on 13D.

Press Release on Schwarzenegger's Veto

[Here]
Press Secretary Margita Thompson says: the matter is before the courts, deciding on voter's ballot initiative -- exactly where it should be. Out of respsect for California's voters, he will veto the bill.

Any Other 2-for-1er's?

Steve feels confident enough that Arnold will veto the Gay Marriage bill, that he unilaterally altered the terms of his bet (see comment under Derek's Post, "Why Bob Should Buy Some Lattes in Bulk") to 2:1 -- he buys me two if I win, while I buy him one if he wins, pointing out that in nearly all previous bets I've lost to him in the past 2 years (and it's been nearly all the bets) taking the cynical side has been a big win for him.

So, how about it, Derek, Robin, Patrick, Erica? Anybody else feeling confident enough to join Steve in the 2-for-1 odds level? I'll mention again that I conceded in the comment below that I had not known that the California Legislature went out of session Sept 9th (pointed out by Derek), after which they would have had to call an emergency session to revive the bill, but could have brought it back up to try to override his veto if he had vetoed it before then, a seemingly very strong argument to explain Arnie's several days delay (now, 5 days, and 2 days past Sept 9th)
in vetoing the Bill after announcing his intention to do so.

Like I said, any other 2-for-1 takers?

Rumsfeld Channeling Washington?

From McCullough's 1776 (p 256):

Once, during the Siege of Boston, when almost nothing was going right and General Schuyler had written from Albany to bemoan his troubles, Washington had replied that he understood but that "we must bear up against them, and make the best of mankind as they are, since we cannot have them as we wish."

In other words: you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might like to have.

Why Bob Should Buy Some Lattes in Bulk

Allow me to address Bob's argument point-by-point:

• Arnold didn't threaten to veto ahead of time because he was hoping the bill wouldn't pass (it was close). If the bill doesn't pass, Arnold doesn't have to end his straddle on gay marriage and alienate a consituency (which he does, either way);
• Once the bill passes, Arnold is forced to choose. If he doesn't veto the bill then it becomes law so that's as good as signing. This is a tough decision, though, so it takes him 24 hours;
• Making and announcing the decision early indicates that he takes the issue seriously, and avoids engendering the bitterness of dashed hopes;
• After announcing his decision, though, he will want to hold off on the actual veto until the legislature goes out of session. This forces the Democrats to call a special session should they be so crazed as to want to attempt an override;
• In the end, the veto is the only politic course of action. If the legislature wants it badly enough they can always override, but the people have spoken, via the ballot proposition, in a pretty strong way;
• Arnold's not gay.

Why Arnold Will Not Veto The Marriage Bill

Now that Steve, Robin, Patrick and Derek have taken the con side of my bet (Pro: That Gov. Arnold does not veto the California Gay Marriage Bill), maybe I should explain my logic a little.

The California legislature passed the Religous Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act on Tuesday Evening (Sept 6th). From that time, Arnie has 30 days in which to sign the bill into law or veto it, after which it passes into law without his signature. After 24 hours, (Sept 7th) Arnie announced that he intends to veto the bill.

For those of you who watch political theatre, this is a complete mis-ordering. As Governor, you don't announce your intention to veto a bill *after* it has passed the legislature, you do so before it has passed, to force the legislature to modify it into a 2/3s veto-proof form, which is nearly impossible to do, and likely would make it acceptable to the Governornor anyhow.

It's now Sept 10th -- a good three plus days after the bill was passed. What's he waiting for? Can't find a pen? Busy with leg curls?

Arnie took 24 hours, not to decide to veto the bill, but to decide *to announce* that he would veto the bill. With 30 days in front of him, this is a political opening, not closing, of the debate: if he wants to sign the bill, he wants to get a bounce from the proponents, and so he needs a conversion story. Announcing that he will veto the bill begins that conversion.

And why would Arnold want to sign the bill? Well, apart from issues of basic fairness, let's say that, somewhere, there's a parallel universe, identical to this one, except that in that Universe, Mr. Universe had sex with other body builders. In that parallel universe, Mr. Universe would be governor, fully knowledgeable of the fact that the gay community has a habit of leaving closeted politicians alone if they generally support gay rights, and outing those who work against them. In that Universe, if Mr. Universe vetoed a gay marriage bill, I think you would see a few gay bodybuilders outing the Governor, which would devestate his support among his base.

Thus, I ask myself: what's the probability that that universe is this universe? Given the Governors aggressive personality, his known penchant for sexual aggression (so far only seen with women), and the obvious joy he takes in domination and humiliation of other men (documented on the body bulding circuit -- for example, by mocking a body builder he used to compete with about his having had sex with his wife), I give it a good 30-50%.

And, if I'm right about that, Arnold will simply announce: "I have always believed that this is a matter to be decided in the courts. Leaving this sort of legal confusion around can only lead to civil strife, which the California economy cannot afford. Therefore, in order to put this matter in front of the courts as quickly as possible and bring the debate to a decisive end, and not cause any more damage to the California economy, I have decided to pass this bill. Vote Arnold for Senator, 2008".

Note, however -- even if I am wrong about why Arnold wants to pass the bill, his waiting 4 days and not simply signing his veto casts suspicions on his intentions. And, motiviations aside, still gives me a read of him that he intends to attempt a conversion story.

bob Sez: no veto

It's beingwidely reported Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has declared he will veto the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, which would give state recognition to same-sex marriage in California.

I'm offering a cappa bet, to anyone who accepts via a comment below, prior to a change in the present situation, that Arnold will, in fact, not veto the bill.

Takers?

Onion Strikes Katrina

God Outdoes Terrorists Yet Again. And be sure to follow the link to the second page to see "Bush Urges Victims To Gnaw On Bootstraps For Sustenance"

A Stunning Statistic

For Bush, a Deepening Divide: "A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken last Friday illustrates the point vividly. Just 17 percent of Democrats said they approved of the way Bush was handling the Katrina crisis while 74 percent of Republicans said they approved. About two in three Republicans rated the federal government's response as good or excellent, while two in three Democrats rated it not so good or poor."

Bush: "Trent Lott's new house is gonna be AWESOME!"

New Orleans is a totall mess, but I can't wait to kick back at Trent's new crib, sez Bush:

"We've got a lot of rebuilding to do. First, we're going to save lives and stabilize the situation. And then we're going to help these communities rebuild. The good news is -- and it's hard for some to see it now -- that out of this chaos is going to come a fantastic Gulf Coast, like it was before. Out of the rubbles of Trent Lott's house -- he's lost his entire house -- there's going to be a fantastic house. And I'm looking forward to sitting on the porch. (Laughter.)"

Comment Spam

So, we're getting comment spam. I turned on a requirement of typing in a distended word. If that doesn't stop it, I'll also limit comments to registered users (since so far the comments are anonymous.

In a nutshell

Since we haven't had a post on Hurricane Katrina, I thought I'd sum it up:

The disaster is being called a casualty of the war in Iraq, and also "George's Blue Dress". The body of water which was once New Orleans is now being called "Lake George". Martial Law has been declared in the area, yet there aren't enough troops to enforce the law. Snipers are firing from rooftops keeping people indoors for hours while they go unchallenged. Why?:

1) Bush said yesterday that no one could have foreseen that the levees would break. This is in direct contradiction to a FEMA report in 2001 naming the New Orleans levee system as one of the top three potential disaster areas. The money for reinforcement was diverted to the war in Iraq.

2) Bush, Cheney AND Condi were all on vacation AFTER the storm occured. Bush waited three days until he decided to 'cancel' his vacation. He flew over New Orleans at 35,000 ft to see the devistation, and is just this morning receiving a 'briefing' of what is going on. Why does he need a briefing, and why did THAT take so long. People reading news are most likely more well informed than the the Commander in Chief. One of Bush's stops before the disaster was a cake eating photo op with John McCain. The cake said "Let them eat cake". For godsake, all you had to do was listen to NPR to know that by Tuesday, that cake would be in bad taste, REGARDLESS of who it is for
Condi - She was out catching a show of "Spamalot", seen purchasing a $1000 pair of shoes (when another shopper approached her and scolded her for being so callous about the disaster, Condi had security physically remove her from the building). She also spent some time catching a tennis match, and also hitting a few to Monica Seles. Condi finally cut her vacation short on Thursday morning, four days after the disaster began. Quite possibly the most disgusting reaction to a national disaster since Bush finished reading "My Pet Goat" while the World Trade Center fell.
Cheney - So where the hell is Cheney? The Washington Post reports that he is on vacation at his home outside Jackson, Wyoming. "He'll be back any day now".


3) FEMA, an organization which has been gutted by the Bush administration is advocatingdonations to Pat Robertson's "Operation Blessing". Bush praises the FEMA director this morning: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job.". 'Brownie' (Michael Brown) also told Katie Couric this morning "people are getting the help they need.". This was also after making a comment that they are "...to help those who are stranded, who chose not to evacuate, who chose not to leave the city..." Apparently, Brownie isn't aware that there is a fairly large number of people in America who do not own cars, could not afford them, nor can they afford to just pick up and leave. These people live hand-to-mouth and demonstrably could not evacuate the area IF THEIR LIVES DEPENDED ON IT.

4) Trent Lott's house was destroyed (well, one of them anyway), and Fats Domino is missing.

5) The US is stalling on help because "The United States Government is not yet requesting international assistance at this time."

6) Thousands of Louisiana's poorest are being bussed out to the Astrodome in Texas. These people, who couldn't afford to leave, will most likely not be able to afford to come back. That, coupled with the fact that many businesses have been destroyed, reinforces the possibility that a significantly large part of the LA population will never return. Dennis Hastart, in an interview with the Chicago Daily Herald editorial board said that "It doesn't make sense to rebuild".

7) Reps are already backtracking on the "Consumer Protection Act of 2005" (which made it harder for people to declare bankruptcy.) Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Rep. Mel Watt, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee announced today that when Congress returns next Tuesday, they will introduce legislation to protect the thousands of families and small businesses financially devastated by Hurricane Katrina from being penalized by anti-debtor provisions contained in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, scheduled to take effect on October 17, 2005. Reps. Conyers, Nadler, and Jackson Lee released the following joint statement:

"We are concerned that just as survivors of Hurricane Katrina are beginning to rebuild their lives, the new bankruptcy law will result in a further and unintended financial whammy. Unfortunately, the new law is likely to have the consequence of preventing devestated families from being able to obtain relief from massive and unexpected new financial obligations they are incurring and by forcing them to repay their debt with income they no longer have, but which is counted by the law.

Ooops. I guess they didn't see that coming. My final thought on this whole disaster is that it couldn't have happened to a redder group of States. You go in to a disaster with the government you voted for, not the government that would actually help you out.

Not to sound too flippant about the whole thing, but this disaster has shown us that the war on terror/war on Iraq has made us extremely vulnerable in many areas. The Bush Team had always repeated the mantra "Americans want to feel safe", so they gutted everything they could to take us into a war where the money was funneled into defense spending, no-bid contracts, etc. Meanwhile at home we are left vulnerable to rising energy costs, inability to protect ourselves from natural disaster, and a distinct sense that we are worse off today than we were 5 years ago. They are running out of fuel in the south, they have no food, shelter or medical supplies, and the death toll will most likely outstrip the World Trade Center and the casualties in Iraq combined. This disaster is going to take us into a new recession, and Bush's unbridled spending will make sure that it lasts generations.

Robin is Visiting

IMG_251
Originally uploaded by rerutled.

Coffee in the morning.

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!