pansauce

Friday Random Ten - The Happy Saturnalia Edition

2005-12-22T21:40:00.000-05:00

White From Here - Holly Figueroa
Dancing with the Women at the Bar - Ryan Adams and Gillian Welch (from a live show in 1999)
Juicy Lucy - Stefan Grossman
New Amsterdam - Elvis Costello and the Attractions
Fear - Sarah McLachlan
Small Swift Birds - Cowboy Junkies (from a live show at the Atlanta Botanical Gardens)
Love You Madly - Ella Fitzgerald
Blue Light Boogie - Louis Jordan
Plenty More - Squirrel Nut Zippers
Cold Winter Day - Blind Willie McTell
Red Door Blues - Indigo Swing

Kudos

2005-12-07T17:13:00.000-05:00

My Congressional Representative, David Scott has called for the withdrawl of U.S. troops from Iraq.

U.S. Rep. David Scott has changed his mind about Iraq. After supporting the war, the Georgia congressman is calling for a removal of U.S. troops from the country. Scott said in an interview Thursday on Atlanta radio station WAOK-AM that he believes the job that the U.S. military was sent to do is finished and "a sizable number of troops" should start coming home. "We cannot go the course we've been going on because we are being viewed as an occupier," said Scott, a two-term conservative Democrat who represents the southern suburbs of Atlanta. "I still support our troops, but I do not support our policy." Scott, who sits on the House National Security Committee, said he changed his stance after the Bush administration "kicked Colin Powell out of the saddle." Scott said a pullout of troops should start by February.

I sent him my thanks this morning.

Friday Random Ten and my home of eternal repose

2005-12-02T16:19:00.000-05:00

Live Free - Son Volt
Vox (Extended Remix) - Sarah McLachlan
Highway 90 - Jane Jensen
All the Pretty Little Horses - Holly Cole
Anna Lee - Elmore James
Alley Flowers - Jolie Holland
You Stepped Out of a Dream - Tal Farlow
Breezin' Along with the Breeze - Josephine Baker
What's the Use of Getting Sober (When You're Gonna Get Drunk Again) - Louis Jordan
Hit That Jive Jack - Diana Krall
Take It With Me - Tom Waits

The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:

Level	Score
Purgatory (Repenting Believers)	Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers)	Extreme
Level 2 (Lustful)	Moderate
Level 3 (Gluttonous)	Moderate
Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious)	Very Low
Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy)	Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics)	Very High
Level 7 (Violent)	High
Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers)	Low
Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous)	Low

Take the Dante's Inferno Hell Test

Friday Random Ten

2005-11-26T01:00:00.000-05:00

Extraordinary Machine - Fiona Apple
Out of this World - Ella Fitzgerald
Them There Eyes - Django Reinhardt
Al Di's Dream Theme - Al Di Meola
Drummin' Man - Gene Krupa
Katmandu - Cat Stevens
Devil Doll - X
Watching the Moonlight - Vigilantes of Love
Bronze - Joshua Redman Quartet
He Never Mentioned Love - Kirsty MacColl
Blue and Sentimental - Count Basie

The book is going well. I've had to back up and throw out some of the stuff that I'd written (well not literally) then go back and do more research, more in depth character studies, and more plotting; but I've greater confidence with what I have and where I'm going with it.

Yep, I'm pretty f*^ked

2005-11-25T23:59:00.000-05:00

Pretty fucked
12 is your Fuckedness Number! Crazy!

You're pretty fucked for the next four years. Why? I don't know, maybe it's because you're actually smart and have real actual morals, and not just the fake Christian kind. Maybe you're a minority. Whatever the reason, you've got fairly high levels of fuckedness. Prepare yourself. It's gonna be a rough 4 years.

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 59% on Fuckedness

Link: The How Fucked by Bush You Are Test written by leelander on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Hark the Harelipped Angels Sing

2005-11-25T23:38:00.000-05:00

Per instructions from The General, here is a card wishing everyone joy and eggnog for ~~the holidays~~ christmas.

Friday Random Ten

2005-11-11T00:30:00.000-05:00

Tracy Chapman - She's Got Her Ticket
Aimee Mann - Dear John
Larry Coryell - Lotus Revelation
Paris Combo - Aléas
Smokey Robinson - Being with You
Jesus Christ Superstar - What's the Buzz/Strange Thing
Bonnie Raitt - One Part Be My Lover
Van Morrison - The Smile You Smile
Buddy Rich Big Band - Goodbye Yesterday
Royal Crown Revue - Swingin' All Day
Absa Gueye - Mane Kouma Khol Thi Yao

It's that time again

2005-11-04T02:28:00.000-05:00

Stefan Grossman - Concrete Parachute
Squirrel Nut Zippers - It's Over
John Fahey - Some Summer Day
Jane Jensen - Candy & Razor Blades
Erin McKeown - Cinematic
The Police - Miss Gradenko
Kelly Hogan and the Pine Valley Cosmonauts - Gone
Melissa Ferick - Fearless
Diana Krall - Pick Yourself Up
Ton Van Bergyk - Light and Bitter
Rev. Gary Davis - Goin' Sit Down on the Banks of the River

Friday Random

2005-10-28T00:27:00.000-05:00

Arrabal Amargo - Carlos Gardel
Spanish Rose - Van Morrison
Yalla Yalla - Joe Strummer and the Mescaleros
Anything but Love - Squirrel Nut Zippers
Togetherness - Tuck & Patti
Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring - Leo Kotte
Quiet Night of Quiet Stars - Ella Fitzgerald
Raspberry Swirl - Tori Amos
Sitting on Top of the World - Howlin' Wolf
Playing Policy Blues - Blind Blake
Grandpa's Spells - Jelly Roll Morton

FYI, the reason I'm not posting very often is that I'm writing a book. I'll talk more about it when I'm further along.

Friday Random Ten (and my latest covet)

2005-10-21T00:45:00.000-05:00

Frevo Rasgado - Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin, and Paco DeLucia
Go On Ahead - Liz Phair
My Way Home - Kirsty McColl
Beneath the Balcony - Iron & Wine
Here's That Rainy Day - Nancy Wilson
Boll Weevil - Blind Willie McTell
Doin' It - Professor Longhair
Suits are Picking Up the Bill - Squirrel Nut Zippers
Cabin in the Sky - Ella Fitzgerald
Ready - John Doe with Kristin Hersh
Come By Me - Harry Connick, Jr

I just learned that Mary Roach has just published her sequal to Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers. It's called Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife.

Me want.

Friday Random Ten and a game

2005-10-13T23:55:00.000-05:00

Blind Willie McTell - Cold Winter Day
X - My Soul Cries Your Name
George Gershwin - Idle Dreams
Leah Andreone - It's Alright, It's Okay
Tom Waits - Lost in the Harbour
Exene Cervenka - Famous Barmaid
Erin McKeown - Civilians
Albert Ammons - Boogie Woogie Stomp
Alien Fashion Show - Hollywood Bungalow
Peggy Lee - I'm a Woman
Winton Marsalis Big Band - Tattooed Bride

And now go play the game Homeless or Jesus. Via Majikthise

Friday Random Ten

2005-10-07T00:00:00.000-05:00

I know, I know, it's been a week since I last posted. My apologies. I promise to do better in the near future.

Anyway, here's this week's random ten (bu' i' goes to eleven).

'Tain't What You Do ( It's The Way That Cha Do It ) - Ella Fitzgerald
Here We Go Again - Ray Charles and Nora Jones
April in Paris - Count Basie
Caldonia - Lee Press-On and the Nails
Death Don't Have No Mercy - Hot Tuna
Where Did My Baby Go - Howard Tate
They Can't Take That Away From Me - Diana Krall
Monkey Man Blues - Big Bill Broonzy with Clarence Lofton
The Assassination of John Fahey - Stefan Grossman
Rockabilly Show - Blacktop Rockets
On Your Wings - Iron & Wine

Friday random ten

2005-09-29T23:23:00.000-05:00

I Mean You - Thelonious Monk
Grapefruit Moon - Tom Waits
Right or Wrong - Kelly Hogan
It Always Rains On A Picnic - Modest Mouse
She's Not - John Doe
Hymn for the Exiled - Anaïs Mitchell
Someday the Waves - Iron & Wine
Search My Heart - Hot Tuna
Chains - Carole King
Please, Please, Please - Fiona Apple
Bug - Kristin Hersh

Buy a Banned Book (cheap)

2005-09-28T19:52:00.000-05:00

Earlier today, The Punning Pundit created a linked list to help those who wanted to buy books on the American Library Association's list of the 100 most challenged books of the year. His suggested vendors were two of the largest on-line book retailers, while I tend to prefer to shop from independent booksellers. So I've decided to create a list of my own. Most of the books on it can be purchased for $1.00 (plus S&H):

Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz
Daddy’s Roommate by Michael Willhoite
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling
Forever by Judy Blume
Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
Alice (Series) by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor
Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman
My Brother Sam is Dead by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier
The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
The Giver by Lois Lowry
It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie Harris
Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine
A Day No Pigs Would Die by Robert Newton Peck
The Color Purple by Alice Walker
Sex by Madonna
Earth’s Children (Series) by Jean M. Auel
The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson
A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle
Go Ask Alice by Anonymous
Fallen Angels by Walter Dean Myers
In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak
The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard
The Witches by Roald Dahl
The New Joy of Gay Sex by Charles Silverstein
Anastasia Krupnik (Series) by Lois Lowry
The Goats by Brock Cole
Kaffir Boy by Mark Mathabane
Blubber by Judy Blume
Killing Mr. Griffin by Lois Duncan
Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam
We All Fall Down by Robert Cormier
Final Exit by Derek Humphry
The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood
Julie of the Wolves by Jean Craighead George
The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison
What’s Happening to my Body? Book for Girls: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Daughters by Lynda Madaras
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Beloved by Toni Morrison
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton
The Pigman by Paul Zindel
Bumps in the Night by Harry Allard
Deenie by Judy Blume
Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes
Annie on my Mind by Nancy Garden
The Boy Who Lost His Face by Louis Sachar
Cross Your Fingers, Spit in Your Hat by Alvin Schwartz
A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Sleeping Beauty Trilogy by A.N. Roquelaure (Anne Rice)
Asking About Sex and Growing Up by Joanna Cole
Cujo by Stephen King
James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl
The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell
Boys and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy
Ordinary People by Judith Guest
American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis
What’s Happening to my Body? Book for Boys: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Sons by Lynda Madaras
Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume
Crazy Lady by Jane Conly
Athletic Shorts by Chris Crutcher
Fade by Robert Cormier
Guess What? by Mem Fox
The House of Spirits by Isabel Allende
The Face on the Milk Carton by Caroline Cooney
Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
Lord of the Flies by William Golding
Native Son by Richard Wright
Women on Top: How Real Life Has Changed Women’s Fantasies by Nancy Friday
Curses, Hexes and Spells by Daniel Cohen
Jack by A.M. Homes
Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo A. Anaya
Where Did I Come From? by Peter Mayle
Carrie by Stephen King
Tiger Eyes by Judy Blume
On My Honor by Marion Dane Bauer
Arizona Kid by Ron Koertge
Family Secrets by Norma Klein
Mommy Laid An Egg by Babette Cole
The Dead Zone by Stephen King
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison
Always Running by Luis Rodriguez
Private Parts by Howard Stern
Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford
Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene
Little Black Sambo by Helen Bannerman
Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett
Running Loose by Chris Crutcher
Sex Education by Jenny Davis
The Drowning of Stephen Jones by Bette Greene
Girls and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy
How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
View from the Cherry Tree by Willo Davis Roberts
The Headless Cupid by Zilpha Keatley Snyder
The Terrorist by Caroline Cooney
Jump Ship to Freedom by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier

Via Amanda at Pandagon

Monkey see...

2005-09-26T23:54:00.000-05:00

Sorry about not posting recently.

I've been a funk for the last couple days and not one with a beat you can dance to. Well, I just bought the latest Terry Prachett, as well as the latest Neil Gaiman, and the fourth season of Gilmore Girls is released tomorrow on DVD and since I've been saving for the past month, I can actually afford it.

Anyway, for your reading pleasure, I present the first recent newspaper article about evolution that's actually pretty good.

decoding chimpanzees' DNA allowed scientists to do more than just refine their estimates of how similar humans and chimps are. It let them put the very theory of evolution to some tough new tests.

If Darwin was right, for example, then scientists should be able to perform a neat trick. Using a mathematical formula that emerges from evolutionary theory, they should be able to predict the number of harmful mutations in chimpanzee DNA by knowing the number of mutations in a different species' DNA and the two animals' population sizes.

"That's a very specific prediction," said Eric Lander, a geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in Cambridge, Mass., and a leader in the chimp project.

Sure enough, when Lander and his colleagues tallied the harmful mutations in the chimp genome, the number fit perfectly into the range that evolutionary theory had predicted.

The article explains, in non-technical language, why evolution by natural selection is a scientific theory and why, by contrast, ID is not.

Asked to provide examples of non-obvious, testable predictions made by the theory of Intelligent Design, John West, an associate director of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based ID think tank, offered one: In 1998, he said, an ID theorist, reckoning that an intelligent designer would not fill animals' genomes with DNA that had no use, predicted that much of the "junk" DNA in animals' genomes -- long seen as the detritus of evolutionary processes -- will someday be found to have a function.

(In fact, some "junk" DNA has indeed been found to be functional in recent years, though more than 90 percent of human DNA still appears to be the flotsam of biological history.) In any case, West said, it is up to Darwinists to prove ID wrong.

"Chance and necessity don't seem to be good candidates for explaining the appearance of higher-order complexity, so the best explanation is an intelligent cause," West said. [emphasis added]

No, it is up to the people positing a scientific theory to provide evidence supporting it.

The article then goes into a basic overview of evolution.

Rather than just take the usual newspaper tactic of "he said, she said" pairing off one quote by a biologist with another quote by someone from the Discovery Institute, Weiss and Brown do a good job, given the length constraints of a newspaper article, explaining what evolutionary theory is.

On the geek scale*, I give this one a π.

(*The geek scale was originally created in the Annals of Improbable Research to grade cafeterias in various research institutions. It ranges from an i, good only in your imagination; to π, 'cause everyone knows pie is good.)

Trick-or-Treat

2005-09-24T02:10:00.000-05:00

I still haven't decided what I want to be this year. If I have to work, I'll probably just go with my understated devil horns, and if I don't I'm leaning towards dressing as the tooth fairy: faerie wings, a wifebeater, and a pair of pliers strung around my neck.

Anyone have any other ideas?

If I'm starting to think about Halloween, it must be close to October.

So long, been good to know ya

2005-09-24T00:25:00.000-05:00

Lester Crawford, the FDA Commissioner who was appointed only two months ago and then proceeded to block over-the-counter sales of Plan B emergency contraception has resigned.

Crawford won a contentious confirmation battle in the Senate after Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt assured Senate Democrats the FDA would act on over-the-counter sales of the morning after pill Plan B by September 1.

But he came under fresh attack in late August when the FDA indefinitely postponed a ruling on whether Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. could sell the Plan B contraceptive without a prescription. The agency's top women's health official resigned in protest.

The FDA also faced a string of drug safety controversies during Crawford's tenure. Some critics charged the agency with being too slow to react to signs of serious side effects from Merck & Co. Inc.'s recalled painkiller Vioxx and other medicines.

...

Sen. Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat, said Crawford's resignation was "a move toward reforming FDA."

"Lester Crawford's leadership at FDA since 2002 has been both tepid and passive. There were so many problems under his watch," Mikulski said.

Excuse me while I shake my groove thang.

Okay, I'm better now.

Mom and Uncle Harvey

2005-09-23T02:47:00.000-05:00

Mom was about three, Uncle Harvey was about five.

And you wanted to know what was wrong with Faith Based social services

2005-09-23T02:22:00.000-05:00

Well, let's look here:

The Republican-led House approved a bill that lets churches and other faith-based preschool centers hire only people who share their religion, yet still receive federal tax dollars.

...

The Republican plan would, for example, let a Catholic church that provides Head Start services employ only Catholic child-care workers.

Democrats and Republicans offered different interpretations of whether the Constitution, federal law and court rulings protected - or prevented - federally aided centers from hiring based on religion.

"Congress should not be in the business of supporting state-sponsored discrimination," said Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla. Said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif.: "The (Republican) majority has decided to choose religious discrimination over what could have been a rare bipartisan agreement."

Since I'm not a Catholic, I understand why the Catholic Church would perfer not to hire someone of my religious persuasion - that's their prerogative. But why in the hell should I be paying for people to discriminate against me, and more importantly, why should my schools be discriminating against me in the first place?

Idiots

2005-09-22T23:48:00.000-05:00

I was trying to access the Speaking of Faith website in order to remind myself about an interview that I heard this week and what do I discover? It's been hacked by idiots.

If you're going to hack a website, why would you hack one from Public Radio? Remember, it's jump the high-bar and limbo the low bar. You hear the phone ringing? It's 2600 calling to laugh at you.
And remember, CSI may teach us that everyone leaves DNA, but only a fucking idiot posts their e-mail address on a site they've hacked.

Friday Random Ten

2005-09-22T23:01:00.000-05:00

Good Intentions - Lyle Lovett
Moonshiner's Child - Miss Tammy Faye Starlite And The Angels Of Mercy
Jewels - Lucas Michailidis
It's No Use - Merle Saunders and Jerry Garcia
Good Love (Shouldn't Feel So Bad) - Kris Kristofferson
Whispering Pines - Kelly Hogan and the Pine Valley Cosmonauts
The New Hula Blues - Taj Mahal
Oh Sailor - Fiona Apple
Watch Her Disappear - Tom Waits
Mad Tom of Bedlam - Jolie Holland
Dancing With Joey Ramone - Amy Rigby

Who the hell's Bianca?

2005-09-22T14:41:00.000-05:00

This interesting little story comes via Salon's War Room's Tim Grieve:

At the beginning of a press briefing at the Pentagon today, George W. Bush took a few relatively tough questions about Hurricane Rita, the administration's failure to capture Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, what he's going to cut to pay for Hurricane Katrina and why it's taking so long to secure Iraq's border with Syria. Just as it seemed that the president needed the breather that a friendly, Jeff Gannon-style query might provide, Bush called for a question from someone named Bianca.

There was silence.

"Nobody named Bianca?" Bush asked. "Well, sorry Bianca's not here. I'll be glad to answer her question."

When another reporter -- someone who wasn't Bianca -- offered to ask a question in her stead, Bush said he was "just trying to spread the joy around of asking a question." A minute or two after that, a female reporter tried to put a question to the president.

"Are you Bianca?" Bush asked.

"No I'm not," she said, "Anita -- from Fox News."

"OK," Bush said. "I was looking for Bianca. I'm sorry."

So, is there actually a teeball reporter pretending to play in the majors whom Bush was told look for if he got into trouble (a la Jeff Gannon) or is it just that he's on the sauce again?

Well, Bianca and Anita do sound a bit alike and Anita is from the propoganda division of the the Republican party. So maybe Bush's handlers forgot to give him his mnemonic, "Mr. President, just sing to yourself, 'I needa/I really need Anita.'...No,sing it to yourself, Mr. President."

One nation, under Diebold (part III)

2005-09-22T01:04:00.000-05:00

Update day, verse three.

I received a reply from Russ Madison on Monday to the e-mail that I sent him last Friday. Sorry it's taken me so long to post it, with the various car problems that I've been dealing with this week, it slipped my mind.

Mr. Smith:

Thank you again for your comments. As I mentioned in my last email to you, we take seriously the concerns of those who have reservations about our touch screen voting platform.

The alert you referenced stems from a Black Box Voting report on alleged security issues in Florida. The election supervisor in Leon County unfortunately allowed unauthorized Black Box Voting activists full and unrestricted access to his GEMS server, and provided his “secret” passwords. Unrestricted and uncontrolled access by the general public to any election management and tabulation system, including mechanical and paper-based systems, could result in a serious compromise of the accuracy and legitimacy of any real-world election, which is why all responsible election officials have clear security protocols for access to voting and tabulation equipment.

If you have read the report, you will note that it purports to have been able to alter the system in two ways. First, the activists claim to have been able to add additional votes to an individual candidate’s vote total. In truth, what was changed were figures in the data tables within the election software. They did not alter the votes on the memory card, nor the internal results of the archived files, which would be easily discernible upon a quick audit of the results.

The second claim made by the activists was the ability to alter an optical scan memory card. In truth, the only portion of the memory card which was accessed was the portion of the card which records written text that appears on the printed tapes. The actual votes could not be accessed nor altered. The activists would not have been able to load the memory card back into the GEMS server because the server will not recognize any memory card which has been changed once it has been downloaded for an election. Were someone able to access a server and change the text on the printed tapes, this security beach would be identified during Logic and Accuracy testing.

Georgia has an extensive testing regimen—beginning with national certification testing and continuing with state certification testing, acceptance testing of all system components, and Logic and Accuracy testing prior to each election. And contrary to what you stated, official election returns in Georgia never include results "uploaded to the central tabulator via modem." While unofficial results may be transmitted by modem, these reports are optional and are completely unofficial.

Basic information on electronic voting in Georgia can be found on our website [here]. Thank you.

Russ Madison, Jr.
State Elections Division
Suite 1104, West Tower
2 Martin Luther King, Jr., Dr. S.E.
Atlanta, GA 30334-1505

You'll note that with the exception of my statement that the data for Fulton and DeKalb counties were uploaded remotely (my information was taken from the interview with the person who works at Diebold), he does not address any of the concerns that I listed.

Specificly,

He doesn't state that his office was ever aware of the US-CERT alert issued before last year's election. Yes, the basis for that alert was the research done by Black Box Voting. However, the US Computer Emergency Readiness Team considered the problem significant enough to send out the alert. I would've expect that alerts from the Department of Homeland Security wouldn't be dismissed so cavalierly.
He doesn't acknowledge that a Diebold insider has verified the vulnerablilites, and admitted that the company has both long known about the potential problem, and has taken no actions to correct it.
And he doesn't state that his office is either planning on taking any action either to correct the problem and/or to hold Diebold responsible.

It doesn't seem as though more letters with that office will be of any use. Maybe the way to go is to contact the AJC.

Librarians in gags

2005-09-21T23:58:00.000-05:00

Welcome to follow-up day, take two.

Remember when I mentioned that U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall had overturned the USA PATRIOT Act gag rule which prevented librarians, bookseller, et al. from even saying that their records had been subject to a warrantless search?

Well, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York decided that librarians look better with a gag and stayed Judge Hall's ruling until they can hear the government's appeal. The Circuit Court has given both sides until October 10 to submit their briefs, though no date for oral arguments has been assigned.

A skirmish in the war on science

2005-09-21T22:49:00.000-05:00

Last week, I wrote a post about two progressive groups attempting to use the Information Quality Act to convince the government to correct the lies told to kids in various Abstinence-Only Sex-Ed curricula.

During the introduction in that post, I mentioned that the IQA is usually used by "business groups to challenge information released by government agencies which might reflect badly on that business."

This week, I ran across a hideously perfect example of this (PDF version):

Two right-wing, industry-backed groups filed a data quality petition with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) challenging the agency's labeling of certain chemicals as "likely human carcinogens." Specifically, the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) and the American Council on Health and Science (ACHS) want EPA to eliminate statements in its Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment that indicate that a substance may properly be labeled as "likely to be carcinogenic to humans" based solely or primarily on the results of animal studies.

These two groups are funded by various business groups and, as you might expect from, tend to give big sloppy kisses to the hands that feed them; to the extent that the WLF has claimed that the link between tobacco use and cancer is "junk science."

As they know perfectly well, the EPA is not going to engage in research intended to induce cancer in humans. The way research as to whether a given substance is a likely carcinogen has long been conducted is to subject various animals (rats notably, though not exclusively) to a variety of doses of the substances in question, and from the results of these animal experiments extrapolate whether, and if so at what level, it poses a risk to humans. The use of animal models to determine human risk is not perfect, but over half a century of these types of experiments have shown that they are quite accurate.

If there were some better method of determining human risk that these groups were promoting, it might be worth while to consider their argument. That, however, is not their goal. If they were to be successful in convincing the EPA that animal models are not useful in determining human risk, the the government would have no basis for claiming that any substance is potentially harmful. Mercury? It's our liquid metal friend. Dioxin? Let's go swimming in it.

Since this challenge does not actually assert that the data the EPA is using is inaccurate, we can hope that it will be consigned to the circular file fairly quickly. This challenge, however, is only one of many that the various government agencies are required by the IQA to duly consider and respond to, again and again, diverting the agencies' resources from actually doing their job to defending against these nuisance filings.

Which, of course, is the intent of the groups making these attacks.

Feminist Bloggers Say No to John Roberts

2005-09-21T00:49:00.000-05:00

Copied in its entirety:

by Liza Sabater (of Culture Kitchen)

To members of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate:

We are a group of writers who are passionately committed to supporting women's basic freedom as citizens of the United States. We are appealing to you as free citizens dedicated to political growth, fairness and the spirit of Liberty guaranteed in the US Constitution.

We are not paid pundits or political operatives. We are concerned citizens who represent the diversity of the United States: women and men, straight and gay, single and married, religious and atheist, of different races, religions and ethnicities. Some of us are even parents even after having abortions. And we all blog because we have to.

We have taken to this citizen media to create communities of hope. In our blogs people rant and rave, discuss and debate to share the one thing we all agree about : The United States Constitution is about creating common ground among the many, not limiting freedom for the benefit of the few.

Yes, the battle for the Supreme Court is about the right to privacy.

Yes, the battle for the Supreme Court is about civil rights.

Yes, the battle for the Supreme Court is about state rights.

Yet what is at stake in the the reconfiguration of the Supreme Court, is the fundamental right to freedom for all peoples living under the Bill of Rights and unenumerated rights retained by the people. Roberts' has consistently opposed the interests of the people in his career. The decisions, dissents and legal documents that have been released for scrutiny point to the man's willingness to find ways to use technicalities to curtail freedom and not expand it. Although it would be easy to demonstrate this willingness through his involvement in cases dealing with reproductive rights, it is the following three cases that show a road map to what could happen to the US Constitution under a Chief Justice Roberts:

Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992)

Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir.2003), cert. denied, 124 S. Ct. 2061 (2004)

Hedgepeth v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 386 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2004):

In defending a religious minority's demand to impose their religious customs on the majority (1), in attacking Congress' right to regulate commerce under national standards (2) and in stating that using the full extent of the law in cases involving minors is necessary to promote "parental awareness of commission delinquent actsÓ (3); John Roberts has advocated positions which

(1) are skewed to the ideology of religious extremists,

(2) balkanize the country into a loose mesh of little republics

(3) use a restrictive fundamentalist view to coerce a moral outcome through legal means

The extremist religious minority in this country have used the excuse of states' compelling interest in children's welfare as a reason to seek limits to the Constitution. Parenting rights are being used to impose unfettered limitations of reproductive rights on the state level. All across the country laws have been passed curtailing the movement of minors from one state to the other in search of abortions. Some states have even made it a capital offense punishable with the death penalty to aid a minor with no parental consent. This is appalling.

These laws have been passed as an affirmation of parents' right to choose in private what is best for their families. Some of us are mothers and fathers and we would most certainly want the government to uphold our rights to choose how to parent our children without intervention of the government. But laws protecting parenting rights should do no harm nor become precedents in the limiting of individual rights.

These laws impose a view of parenting that may actually be harmful to many underage women in need of an abortion. To restrict their individual rights and define them as extensions of their parents or guardians endangers not only endanger young women's lives but are an attack on the very idea of individual rights and personal freedom.

Judge Roberts' rulings can become a weapon for extremists who would impose their reproductive agendas against the will of their underage yet sexually mature daughters. It exposes young women in abusive or coercive situations to further abuse and physical danger.

We advocate Freedom.

The right to determine one's own sexual and reproductive behavior is a fundamental aspect of liberty. A woman's ability to control her reproductive options has a profound effect on her health and on every aspect of her life. It can affect her educational opportunities, her career and is the single most profound change that can occur in her life. Pregnancy is a life-altering and potentially life-threatening experience. Consider these statistics:

* The United States ranks below 20 other developed nations in the rate of maternal deaths.

* The maternal death rate has not gone down since 1982.

* The Rate of maternal deaths for black women has been three to four times that of white women since 1940.

* Complications of pregnancy include ectopic pregnancy, premature labor, hemorrhage, blood clots, high blood pressure, infection, stroke, amniotic fluid in the bloodstream, diabetes and heart disease. Poor women suffer disproportionately due to lack of prenatal care and inadequate health insurance.

* The number one cause of death in pregnant women in America is murder.

The choice to have a child must be made by an individual, without coercion from any external source or influence, if the individual is to be considered truly free. The current anti-choice movement has revealed itself repeatedly as uninterested in preventing unwanted pregnancies or reducing the number of abortions performed in this country. If this were truly their goal, they would be anxious to make "Plan B" contraceptives readily available. We know it is not an abortificant, and merely prevents pregnancy from taking place. If the goal was to protect young women's lives, they would encourage educating women about the use of condoms in preventing the spread of HIV and other venereal diseases, and the prevention of unwanted pregnancy.

Women are more likely than men to contract HIV through sexual encounters and about 42 per cent of all persons infected with HIV are women.

Cancer of the cervix, the most common form of cancer in developing countries, is often linked to the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus. There are already moves to block the availability of a vaccine being developed which could prevent this form of cancer.

To withhold this information to young women is to literally condemn some of them to death. Those who oppose women's reproductive autonomy oppose all of these things that could make having a child or even having sex a safer experience. It is clear that they are not interested in the healthy births of healthy children, but in controlling sexual behavior of women by codifying a particular, restrictive religious view in the laws of our country. It is not the place of government to legislate morality for its citizens. It is the place of government to insure the health and well-being of its people. It is clear that if women's reproductive freedom is restricted that women will die needlessly and many women and their children will suffer unnecessarily.

Opposing women's reproductive autonomy is to oppose the unalienable right to Liberty with which each individual is naturally endowed. Freedom to live as we choose, freedom to love whomever we love, freedom to pursue happiness in our own way, without coercion from our neighbors or the state. This is why we oppose John Roberts: We believe it is not the place of government to legislate morality for its citizens. We know that a woman who cannot control her own person is not free.

If Congress is to appoint conservative jurists, We The People demand they are mainstream conservatives that will uphold the Constitution as a common ground for all, not the playground of the few. It is the place of government to insure every single person in this country has an opportunity to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Moreover, as Congress comes together to consider the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, it has to ask how two years on the bench can possibly make a person qualified to be the top jurist in the land. We are deeply disturbed that Judge Roberts attempted to conceal his membership in the Federalist Society, and his role in Bush V. Gore.

We have seen the tragic consequences of George W. Bush's patronage appointments in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. We must be more vigilant in vetting the qualifications, experience and abilities of the nominees put forth by the Bush administration.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court must be a seasoned judge with a record that can be openly and completely examined. The White House's refusal to release all documents pertaining to the nominee is further cause for extreme caution in this matter. Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing. This choice will affect the lives of all Americans for decades to come. We must have transparency in the process, and it must be rigorous and thorough.

We oppose the nomination of John Roberts, and ask that our Congressional representatives stand firm in insisting that the people chosen to fill the two vacancies on the Supreme Court of the United States of America be people on whom we can rely to uphold the ideals that make us uniquely American --equal protection under the law, justice for all citizens in equal measure, equal opportunity, and true Liberty - the right to personal and individual autonomy.

Anything less cannot be allowed to exist if we are to call ourselves the descendants of Jefferson and Adams, or Washington and Franklin. Without a secular government and equal treatment for all, we cannot call ourselves Americans anymore.

Poetry meme

2005-09-19T21:10:00.000-05:00

An LJ friend of mine has suggested that everyone post their favorite poem. Well, I think The Wasteland is a bit long for a blog post, so here are some others that I like:

After the Philharmonic

Two paths diverged in a well-known park,
One well-lit, the other -- dark.
And since I did not wish to die,
I took the one more traveled by.

--James Camp

Okay, that was short. Here's another one:

Shake and shake
The catsup bottle.
None will come,
And then a lot’ll.

--Richard Armour

This last one's for Amanda (Not that I'm saying this to her. I'm just sharing):

you fit into me

you fit into me
like a hook into an eye

a fish hook
an open eye

--Margaret Atwood

Happy, Talk Like A Pirate Day

2005-09-19T14:45:00.000-05:00

Yes, once again it's Talk Like A Pirate Day.

And now for your visual edification, er...avast, me mateys, th' Pirate Keyboard:

And now, for our friends in New Orleans in the newly re-opened French Quarter, this is part of Bush Minor's speech from last week translated into Pirate Talk:

I know that when ye sit on th' steps o' a porch 'ere a homeport once stood, or sleep on a cot in a crowded shelter, 'tis hard t' imagine a bstarboard future. But that future will come. Th' streets o' Biloxi an' Gulfport will again be filled wi' lovely homes an' th' sound o' children playin'. Th' churches o' Alabama will be havin' the'r broken steeples mended an' the'r congregations whole. An' here in New Orlists, th' street cars will once again rumble down St. Charles, an' th' passionate soul o' a great city will return."

Of course, since Bush took the power with him when he left, I guess they're just screwed.

Via Feministe and Language Log.

Well, at least we know what his priorities are

2005-09-19T01:59:00.000-05:00

From this week's Time:

Federal troops aren't the only ones looking for bodies on the Gulf Coast. On Sept. 9, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions called his old law professor Harold Apolinsky, co-author of Sessions' legislation repealing the federal estate tax, which was encountering sudden resistance on the Hill. Sessions had an idea to revitalize their cause, which he left on Apolinsky's voice mail: "[Arizona Sen.] Jon Kyl and I were talking about the estate tax. If we knew anybody that owned a business that lost life in the storm, that would be something we could push back with."

If legislative ambulance chasing looks like a desperate measure, for the backers of repealing the estate tax, these are desperate times. Just three weeks ago, their long-sought goal of repeal seemed within reach, but Katrina dashed their hopes when Republican leaders put off an expected vote. After hearing from Sessions, Apolinsky, an estate tax lawyer who says his firm includes three multi-billionaires among its clients, mobilized the American Family Business Institute, a Washington-based group devoted to estate tax repeal. They reached out to members along the Gulf Coast to hunt for the dead.

It's been hard. Only a tiny percentage of people are affected by the estate tax—in 2001 only 534 Alabamans were subject to it. And for Hill backers of repeal, that's only part of the problem. Last year, the tax brought in $24.8 billion to the federal government. With Katrina's cost soaring, estate tax opponents need to find a way to make up the potential lost income. For now, getting repeal back on the agenda may depend on Apolinsky and his team of estate-sniffing sleuths, who are searching Internet obituaries among other places. Has he found any victims of both the hurricane and the estate tax? "Not yet," Apolinsky says. "But I'm still looking."

Just when I thought people couldn't get any creepier.

A Power Pack movie?

2005-09-19T00:22:00.000-05:00

They're making a freakin' Power Pack movie?

Isn't that one of the signs of the apocralypse?

More Bull

2005-09-18T03:07:00.000-05:00

Last weekend, I mentioned that Elizabeth Reyes, an attorney with the elections division of the Texas Secretary of State, was fired after she answered what she believed to be a hypothetical question about whether a person who claims a rental house he owns to be his homestead should be allowed to vote. She was unaware that the hypothetical question described the exact situation that Karl Rove asserts.

Well, a bit more of the timeline has been filled in, and - surprise, surprise - her firing occurred immediately after her boss received a call from the éminence grise himself.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove personally called the Texas secretary of state about a newspaper story quoting a staff lawyer about whether Mr. Rove was eligible to vote in the state.

The lawyer was subsequently fired.

Of course, Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams says Karl didn't ask for her dismissal. Why would he have to when Williams knows how to read his friend's signs.

"Karl's a friend of mine, so when he read something in the paper, he called," Mr. Williams said. "Naturally, he had a way to get hold of me, as we're friends. He wanted to know if that's where we stood on the issue, and that was that."

Via Talking Points Memo.

Camp Casey Memorial Stolen

2005-09-17T16:22:00.000-05:00

Casey Sheehan's Boots Are Gone

By Deborah Mathews
Staff Writer

September 15, 2005 3:23 PM

CRAWFORD — The Camp Casey Memorial on Prairie Chapel Road was removed by thieves earlier today. Not a single item is left at the memorial site.

Crew members working for McLennan County said they witnessed items being removed by an unidentified individual and contacted their office to inform commissioners.

Upon arrival at Camp Casey, honor guard members who had been at the Crawford Peace House immediately called McLennan County Sheriff’s Deputy R. Polansky to report the theft.

Among the items stolen were numerous crosses, Casey Sheehan’s boots, tents, and other items.

Via Jill at Feministe

Science, schmience

2005-09-17T03:23:00.000-05:00

Last Thursday, Terry Gross interviewed Chris Mooney, the author of The Republican War on Science. (As soon as I can find a discounted copy of the book, I'm going to read it. I promise.) The interview was interesting and worth a listen.

Well, because journalistic balance must be maintained, she followed Chris by interviewing Robert Walker, former advisor to the 2000 Bush campaign on Science and Technology:

Robert Walker, a retired congressman from Pennsylvania who served as chairman of the Science Committee, responds to allegations that the Bush administration has mishandled scientific issues. Walker now serves as chairman of Wexler & Walker, a lobbying firm in Washington, D.C.

I suppose it would have been too much to ask that the Bush campaign actually have a scientist advising it about science and technology. But I digress. Here is a transcript of the interview starting from about 4:50. (I transcribed this myself, editing out only the "Ums", "Uhs" and the like. If I made any errors, forgive me.)

Robert Walker: But scientists then have a burden of proof to assure that the peer review that is done of their science is in fact a peer review of science and not with a political bias to it. During the 1990s, much of the work that was done on global warming, for example, became highly suspect because it was being done in an atmosphere that anything that you had to say on the formulation of models for global warming was almost accepted out of hand by the government because the review panel did not represent a broad cross-section of the views on that issue. For example, there were a lot of scientists who spoke out on global warming during the 1990s who have no credentials as climatologists whatsoever. They were people, they were social scientists. There were a whole group of scientists who did not have background in the science to which they were speaking.

Terry Gross: Whether that is true - you know, if that is true they were social scientists who spoke out - there were also many climate scientists who spoke out, and those climate scientists seemed to pretty much be in agreement that global warming is a major issue and global warming is a result, at least in part, of human activity.

RW: The climatologists had not come to that conclusion, and if you look at the broad base of climatologists who have spoken out on the issue, they have been very circumspect about what they've said. They do believe that there is a warming trend, but most of them are unwilling at the present time to say that that trend is a result of some induced activity; that it may well be a part of larger trends, and that's one of the things that needs to be investigated. That's one of the things where the Bush administration has put a good deal of money is in trying to figure out just exactly what we're dealing with here. Are we dealing with multi-decadal trends that involve climate being climate, or are we in, do we have human related activity which is having a detrimental impact. And a large portion of the climatology community has not yet come to that conclusion.

TG: Do you think it's a large portion, or a minority?

RW: No, I think it's a large portion of climatologists who are not prepared to say that we have global warming and it absolutely is a result of human activity. You know, the Union of Concerned Scientists and some of the liberal ideology says that, but the climatologists are very, very reluctant to be put in that kind of a position.

Okay, so first he suggests that social scientists constitute a major block of climatologists' peer reviewers in the '90s. While I haven't been able to locate a reasonably comprehensive list of the editors of climatology related journals during that decade; the vast, vast majority of current editors of these periodicals are scientists specializing in climatology and related subjects (physicists specilizing in the physics of weather, atmospheric chemists, etc). I believe that my doubts as to the preponderance of social scientists on these panels in the previous decade is justified.

More importantly though, Walker asserts, "No, I think it's a large portion of climatologists who are not prepared to say that we have global warming and it absolutely is a result of human activity." Since he specificly uses the term "large portion" in preference to the offered term "minority", "large portion" must be interpreted to mean "half or greater."

So let's double check and see who disagrees with him:

Well the American Meterological Society does:: Because human activities are contributing to climate change, we have a collective responsibility to develop and undertake carefully considered response actions. The fundamental challenge is to understand and respond to the risk represented by climate change in the larger context of overall societal issues and environmental stresses.
The National Academy of Sciences, headed by Earth Systems Scientist, Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone, does:: Laboratory measurements of gases trapped in dated ice cores have shown that for hundreds of thousands of years, changes in temperature have closely tracked atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Burning fossil fuel for energy, industrial processes, and transportation releases carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is now at its highest level in 400,000 years and continues to rise. Nearly all climate scientists today believe that much of Earth’s current warming has been caused by increases in the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, mostly from the burning of fossil fuels.
And the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does, as well:: There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. Detection and attribution studies consistently find evidence for an anthropogenic signal in the climate record of the last 35 to 50 years. These studies include uncertainties in forcing due to anthropogenic sulfate aerosols and natural factors (volcanoes and solar irradiance), but do not account for the effects of other types of anthropogenic aerosols and land-use changes. The sulfate and natural forcings are negative over this period and cannot explain the warming; whereas most of these studies find that, over the last 50 years, the estimated rate and magnitude of warming due to increasing greenhouse gases alone are comparable with, or larger than, the observed warming. The best agreement between model simulations and observations over the last 140 years has been found when all the above anthropogenic and natural forcing factors are combined

The American Meterological Society is the primary association of American climatologists, the National Academy of Sciences is the premiere organization of American scientists, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the foremost group of climatologists internationally. All three of these groups agree that global warming is one of the major problems facing our planet and that human contributions to greenhouse gasses represent the primary cause of global warming in our time. To the best that I have been able to determine, all of these groups operate on democratic principles; i.e. in order for any of the organizations to put forth a specific position, the majority of its members must vote to support that position. Therefore, lacking any organized survey of climatologists, the only reasonable conclusion is that a "large portion" of climate scientists do not disagree with the assertion that "we have global warming and it absolutely is a result of human activity."

The rest of the Walker interview follows along the lines of the section that I've chosen to investigate. If you have the stomach, it's worth listening to, if only so you can get a basic understanding about what the other side believes vis a vis science. In particular, listen to him avoid the question about whether or not Intelligent Design is science and should be taught in our nation's science classes.

And don't let the door hit you on the way out

2005-09-16T22:52:00.000-05:00

As you may remember, Susan Wood resigned as head of the Food and Drug Administration's Office of Women's Health two weeks ago because of the Bush Minor administration's continuing to ignore its scientific advisors, particularly with respect to Plan B emergency contraception being approved for over-the-counter sales.

Today, a new director of the Office of Women's Health was appointed Theresa A. Toigo. As of this moment, I don't have enough information to hold any sort of expectation about what kind of director she would be. There is however, at the top of the press release (dated Sept. 16, 2005) the following statement:

This is a revision of this statement posted earlier on September 16.

What was that mysterious statement posted earlier today? It's no longer available on the FDA website. Through the magic of google cache, however, we can learn that for possibly the shortest tenure of any head of a major department in government Dr. Norris Alderson, not only not a woman, but also a veterinarian, was appointed acting head of the Office of Women's Health. Perhaps Shrubbie's FDA bought a clue as to how this would look.

Via Tim Grieve

One nation, under Diebold (part II)

2005-09-16T15:31:00.000-05:00

Well, I received a response from the Secretary of State's office. Of course it doesn't actually address my concerns, but it's a start:

Dear Mr. Smith:

Thank you for your recent email about our voting system. The equipment comprising Georgia's voting system has been used successfully in over 500 elections since its debut in 2002. Three separate independent studies by the University of Georgia have shown that Georgians have extremely high levels of confidence in the accuracy and security of our statewide voting system -- and those confidence levels are much higher than with our previous, antiquated mechanical and paper-based systems. Nevertheless, we take seriously the concerns of those who have reservations about our touch screen voting platform. Achieving an even broader level of public confidence in the elections process is an important goal that we continue to strive for. In addition to implementing the most intensive and robust voting security safeguards found anywhere in the nation, the leadership and staff of the State Elections Division has been aggressively researching and evaluating new voter verification technologies -- including paper receipt systems. Our staff has traveled to Nevada, Maryland and several other states to evaluate these technologies first-hand. Staff from the Kennesaw State University Center for Election Systems has also been involved in this evaluation work as well.

Many of these devices are prototypes, and have not yet been extensively tested in real-world election settings. Some have considerable potential, while others appear to have significant flaws. (It is important to note that the voting system we acquired in 2002 was not an experimental prototype nor would we have ever considered an unproven new technology -- it in fact had been used widely in jurisdictions across the country in numerous elections.) It's also worth noting that there are external audit and verification devices that use audio or video recording approaches instead of paper, and there is considerable debate in academic and industry circles as to which of these technologies would add the most security and value to the electronic voting process.

We believe strongly that federal standards are needed to clearly establish how a paper-based or other voter verification technology should operate and how that record should be stored. We also need to answer the question of what constitutes the official ballot, and how and under what circumstances this external record will be tallied in a recount. The director of Georgia's Elections Division is currently participating on a national panel to help move this process forward so that clear federal standards for new voter verification technologies can be created.

In our view, any new external verification device must not only enhance public confidence -- it must also not jeopardize the huge gains we have already achieved in voter accessibility and accuracy in Georgia. Data from academic researchers at the Cal Tech-MIT Voting Technology Project shows that, with the deployment of our statewide electronic voting platform, Georgia moved from second worst in the nation in voting error rates in 2000 to second best in that measurement in 2004. In fact, Georgia's gain in voting accuracy was the highest in the nation. We take great pride in that improvement and want to insure that it is preserved in future elections. We are also mindful of the need to retain the excellent accessibility features of our current platform that benefits the visually impaired, blind and disabled. Concerns, including some expressed by paper receipt advocates, have also been raised that some receipt systems can compromise the secrecy of the ballot by permitting arriving voters to view the printed choices made by the previous user of the voting terminal.

Before acquiring and deploying a paper receipt or other external verification device, we believe we must have a system that:

Meets new federal standards -- which are currently under development;

Meets all the requirements of federal certification, including extensive testing for functionality and reliability; and passes state certification tests conducted by the KSU Center for Election Systems;

Does not negatively impact ballot accessibility for blind, visually impaired or disabled voters;

Does not compromise the secrecy of the ballot;

Maintains a high level of voting accuracy;

Is user-friendly for voters and is easily deployed, monitored and maintained by county election personnel and poll workers; and
Has been proven highly reliable in real-world elections.

Indeed, all but one of these are the same criteria we applied in our evaluation of candidates for the existing statewide platform when it was acquired in 2002. We believe that, once these reasonable criteria are met, and the state has funds available, an external voter verification system can be deployed as an enhancement to our already highly secure and accurate system.

Adding a paper receipt or other external verification device to our current platform seems, on its face, to be simple and easy. In fact, there are important questions to be answered, standards to be set and real-world experience needed with this emerging technology. There are promising developments occurring in voter verification technology and we are closely monitoring that progress. We are also anxious to see the completion of federal standards, which can set forth clear guideposts for how verification systems should operate effectively in an elections setting.

Finally, it is important to point out that legislation passed by the General Assembly this year makes a very significant change to our absentee voting process in Georgia. Under this provision of HB 244, any voter may now request a mailed paper absentee ballot for any reason. This change effectively creates a paper-based, vote by mail option available to every Georgia voter purely as a matter of choice and preference. For any voter who prefers not to use a touch screen terminal and would prefer, instead, to cast a paper ballot, this option is now available without limitation.

Thank you again for expressing your concerns and for your interest in the security of Georgia's voting system.

State Elections Division
www.sos.state.ga.us
www.georgiacounts.com

To which I responded:

Dear Mr. Madison,
Thank you for your form letter. While I do believe that maintaining a paper trail is one necessary part of having the verifiable system necessary for maintaining faith in our election system, my question did not refer to that issue at all.

My concerns are these:

When did your office become aware of the US-CERT alert issued in August, 2004 concerning the undocumented "backdoor" inserted into the GEMS voting tabulation system by Diebold programmers? (Note: the existence of this "backdoor" has been recently verified by a Diebold employee.)

Since becoming aware of the problem, what steps has your office taken to ensure that this problem has been corrected?

While this problem is inherent in all of Diebold's GEMS Central Tabulator, releases including, though possibly not limited to, 1.17.7 and 1.18 - whether the votes are loaded on-site or remotely - of particular concern are those electoral districts (such as Fulton and DeKalb counties) where the votes are uploaded to the central tabulator via modem. In these cases, a person with knowledge of the "backdoor" could change the vote counts without having to physically enter the electoral office. What actions has your office taken to warn all electoral divisions within Georgia of the problem and train them on the proper usage of this technology?

Since the management of Diebold has been aware of this problem for over a year and has yet to take any independent action, has this company been blacklisted from bidding on future contracts issued by the Secretary of State? And, if not, why not?

Thank you again,
Charles Smith

We'll see how he answers this time.

Section 8 v. Bushvilles

2005-09-16T01:06:00.000-05:00

Last week Kevin Drum passed along a suggestion that the best way to help those who have been displaced by Hurricane Katrina is by an expansion of Section 8 vouchers by HUD.

[N]o new federal program is required to match families suddenly needing housing with an existing stock of vacant apartments. The United States government already operates a program that would enable low-income families to pay the rent for these units. The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program currently serves about two million families throughout the country. It enables participants to occupy privately owned units renting for up to, and somewhat above, the local median rent. Enormous numbers of vacant units could be occupied immediately by families with these housing vouchers.

Yesterday, The New Republic chimed in with their support for the idea.

According to the latest estimates, the government may need to provide homes for at least 200,000 households displaced by Katrina--an effort that would be unprecedented in scale but not in kind. Back in 1994, the Clinton administration faced a similar situation after the Northridge earthquake displaced more than 20,000 people in Southern California. It quickly dispatched Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Henry Cisneros to Los Angeles and produced a proposal to offer the newly homeless emergency vouchers, which they could apply toward apartment rents. The initiative was modeled on an existing program called Section 8, a bipartisan favorite that breaks up concentrations of poverty by providing vouchers and support services to help low-income families move into neighborhoods with better jobs and schools. Soon, vouchers were getting into the hands of displaced residents, who in turn began finding apartments. While the operation was hardly seamless, more than 10,000 people used the vouchers. Many later said they ended up better off than they had been before the earthquake. ("This is the biggest break I've had in a long time," one voucher recipient told the Los Angeles Times.)

While there has been support for this idea from people on both sides of the Washington divide - the Senate passed a proposal of this type earlier in the week - it doesn't appear that the House has any plans to take up the issue. In fact, the administration has instead ordered over 100,000 mobile homes, apparently planning to construct Bushvilles to quarter the displaced residents.

As we were all made exceedingly aware over the past few weeks, vast numbers of the people currently needing our help do not have cars. I, for one, have no confidence that these Bushvilles will be constructed with the consideration that many of the people living in them will need regular access to public transportation (which tends to be less than ideal in the Southeast to begin with). Among the many arguments why Section 8 vouchers are preferrable to concentrating these people in moble home parks (such as the usefulness of living in mixed income developments for helping impoverished people to climb higher in society), vouchers would allow people to decide for themselves how to handle their transportation situation. People without cars would tend to choose to live on a bus line, while those with reliable transportation might choose to live in other areas which they consider to be better suited to their needs.

Instead of trying to force a "one size fits all" solution to the problem these people are facing, wouldn't a solution that allows greater choices and supports the local entrepreneurs who developed and own rental housing be the better idea to work with?

But then of course,

while the pressing human crisis of Katrina (not to mention the political backlash at the bungled federal response) has forced the administration to spend lavishly on hurricane relief, it has instinctively looked away from government and toward private firms like the Shaw Group, which won a no-bid contract to construct mobile homes. (Shaw's lobbyist, in case you hadn't heard, is Joe Allbaugh, the former FEMA director and Bush campaign manager.)

Friday random ten

2005-09-16T00:21:00.000-05:00

Sunset Soon Forgotten - Iron & Wine
Here I Am - Lyle Lovett
Turn Away - Maria McKee
December, 1999 - Jolie Holland
Duncan & Brady - Peter Mulvey
Looks Like I'm Up Shit Creek Again - Tom Waits
bad tooth doctor - Leslie Helpert
I'll Go To My Grave Loving You - Kelly Hogan
Vaseline Machine Gun - Leo Kottke
1984 - Anaïs Mitchell
Mama Don't - John Doe with Veronica Jane and Dave Alvin

One nation, under Diebold

2005-09-16T00:15:00.000-05:00

From The Brad Blog (via The Raw Story):

In exclusive stunning admissions to The BRAD BLOG some 11 months after the 2004 Presidential Election, a "Diebold Insider" is now finally speaking out for the first time about the alarming security flaws within Diebold, Inc's electronic voting systems, software and machinery. The source is acknowledging that the company's "upper management" -- as well as "top government officials" -- were keenly aware of the "undocumented backdoor" in Diebold's main "GEM Central Tabulator" software well prior to the 2004 election. A branch of the Federal Government even posted a security warning on the Internet.
Pointing to a little-noticed "Cyber Security Alert" issued by the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT), a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the source inside Diebold -- who "for the time being" is requesting anonymity due to a continuing sensitive relationship with the company -- is charging that Diebold's technicians, including at least one of its lead programmers, knew about the security flaw and that the company instructed them to keep quiet about it.

"A vulnerability exists due to an undocumented backdoor account, which could [allow] a local or remote authenticated malicious user [to] modify votes," states the US-CERT alert, issued in August, 2004.

"I was aware of the Diebold security flaw and had heard about the Homeland Security Cyber Alert Threat Assessment website, so I went there and 'bingo,' there it was in black and white," the source wrote. "It blew me away because it showed that DHS, headed by a Cabinet level George Bush loyalist, was very aware of the 'threat' of someone changing votes in the Diebold Central Tabulator. The question is, why wasn't something done about it before the election?"
The CEO of North Canton, Ohio-based Diebold, Inc., Walden O'Dell has been oft-quoted for his 2003 Republican fund-raiser promise to help "Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." O'Dell himself was a high-level contributor to the Bush/Cheney '04 campaign as well as many other Republican causes.
...
In trying to understand why the U.S. Homeland Security Department's Cyber Alert didn't force Diebold to make fixes, patches or corrections quickly available for their software prior to -- or even since -- the '04 election, DIEB-THROAT repeated over and over that Diebold was simply "not concerned about security".
"They don't have security solutions. They don't want them...They leave security policy issues up to the states. They've known about this for some time. They don't really care," the source said, comparing the security flaw to "leaving the front door at Fort Knox open." It's just "blatant sloppiness and they don't care."
The versions of the GEMS Central Tabulation software listed on the US-CERT site are 1.17.7 and 1.18 and DIEB-THROAT says the same versions of the same software are still in use by States around the country and haven't had any fixes or patches applied to correct the problem.

Obviously, this administration is not going to take this issue seriously. I'm hoping it's not too much to ask that my Democratic Secretary of State, Cathy Cox, might take an interest. But given how much she has invested in believing that the system is fool proof, I'm not holding my breath.

To give her a chance, I did write the following e-mail to her:

Dear Secretary Cox,
Previously, theories about potential problems with the Diebold's electronic voting machines have been announced by various computer scientists.
Now we learn from the US-CERT website that the reality of an undocumented backdoor was known to the government, and neither they nor Diebold itself took any action to correct this backdoor.
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001838.htm
What are you doing to ensure that the faith we need to have in Georgia's elections are justified?
Thank you,
Charles Smith

I'll let you know how she responds.

Cute

2005-09-15T00:44:00.000-05:00

Corner Office Beauty Launches Whistleblower Lip Balm, Offers Tribute To Eliot Spitzer

Beauty Company eschews celebrity endorsements, dedicates first batch of Whistleblower to law enforcement icon.

Toronto, ON (PRWEB via PR Web Direct) September 13, 2005 -- Corner Office Beauty, North America's hottest new fragrance and body care line, today announced that its inaugural batch of Whistleblower lip balm has been dedicated to New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.

"Eliot Spitzer's crusade against financial market fraud has inspired us in our own crusade against poor lip care," Corner Office Beauty President Suzie Dingwall Williams said. "With time, consumer education and lots of essential oils and antioxidants, we aim to reduce the overall rate for beauty crimes to the same low levels we now enjoy for white collar crime."

The first 10,000 sticks of Whistleblower will be labeled in a limited edition color that the company likes to call "Spitzer silver," Dingwall Williams said. "This seems particularly apt to us since, traditionally, a silver bullet was the only weapon that could kill a giant or a person leading a charmed life."

The launch of Whistleblower could not have come at a better time. "Financial market reforms of the last few years have resulted in an unprecedented boom in whistleblowing employees. While federal law protects them from retribution, it does nothing to guard against the drying effects that seasonal change brings, particularly now, as we enter the fourth quarter."

Suing for the truth

2005-09-15T00:34:00.000-05:00

The little-known law, the Information Quality Act has until now primarily been used by business groups to challenge information released by government agencies which might reflect badly on that business. "For example, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Salt Institute filed a petition challenging the government's finding that reduced sodium consumption will result in lower blood pressure in all individuals."

Now however, two groups are utilizing the law to challenge the rampant inaccuracies that fill the nation's abstinence only sex-ed classes. From the AP:

Two organizations that promote sex education are taking an unorthodox approach in their fight against federal funding of abstinence-only education programs.

Relying on a little-used law that allows "affected persons" to seek the correction of information disseminated by federal agencies, the groups said Tuesday that the abstinence education programs contain erroneous and ineffective information. They asked the Health and Human Services Department to correct it.

The groups, Advocates for Youth and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States hold onto the hope that our schools' health classes could actually teach accurate information:

They called on the Administration for Children and Families to cease sponsorship of programs that fail to provide medically accurate information.

For example, dozens of grantees teach that condom use reduces the risk of contracting HIV/AIDS by 69 percent to 90 percent. The two groups say that such instruction greatly underestimates the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV/AIDS, and the numbers result from a study that the department itself described as having conclusions based on "serious error."

"Never in recent history has so much government money been put into so many programs with so little oversight and so little proven impact," Wagoner said.

Amy Sullivan wrote an excellent article last year in the Washington Monthly about the complete lack of oversight into the billions of dollars given to "faith-based groups" in this administration. While I'm not suggesting that all abstinence-only sex-ed curriclua are linked to faith-based organizations, it is just one more example of the fact that the ideological allies of the president are given carte blanche to lie, cheat and steal.

Finally, some of them are being called on it.

Update (20050922.2355): For an example of a business group using the IQA, look here.

A ding in the Patriot Act's armor

2005-09-12T17:03:00.000-05:00

One of the lesser known provisions of the USA Patriot Act states that not only are records of libraries, bookstores, and the like subject to search by the FBI without a warrant by using a National Security Letter; but also that the librarians, booksellers, et al. are not allowed to say that they've recieved such a letter.

That provision was overturned last Friday by a US District Judge:

Prosecutors argued that the gag order blocked the release of the client’s identity, not the client’s ability to speak about the Patriot Act. They said revealing the client’s identity could tip off suspects and jeopardize a federal investigation into terrorism or spying.

Hall rejected the argument that the gag order didn’t silence the client.

“The government may intend the non-disclosure provision to serve some purpose other than the suppression of speech,” Hall wrote. “Nevertheless, it has the practical effect of silencing individuals with a constitutionally protected interest in speech and whose voices are particularly important in an ongoing national debate about the intrusion of governmental authority into individual lives.”

The ruling rejected the gag order in this case, but it did not strike down the provision of the law used by the FBI to demand the library records. A broader challenge to that provision is still pending before Hall.

...

Hall also expressed concerns about the act, writing: “The potential for abuse is written into the statute: the very people who might have information regarding investigative abuses and overreaching are preemptively prevented from sharing that information with the public and with the legislators who empower the executive branch with the tools used to investigate matters of national security.”

Judge Hall stayed her ruling until Sept. 20, and while this ruling doesn't affect the larger issue of the validity of warrentless searches of library records, she will be ruling on those later.

EPA Withholds Katrina Pollution Data

2005-09-12T16:23:00.000-05:00

A press release from the Society of Environmental Journalists, reprinted in its entirety:

Katrina only latest example of feds withholding environmental data

JENKINTOWN, PA. - It's been more than a week since The Times-Picayune newspaper of New Orleans turned in desperation to the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to answer a basic question: Where are dangerous chemicals leaking as a result of Hurricane Katrina?

The paper's lead hurricane reporter, Mark Schleifstein, had been asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that question for days - without an answer. So he filed a request under FOIA. Even though the federal statute provides for "expedited review" when a situation "could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the life or physical safety" of the public, he still has not received a response.

The request by Schleifstein, a member of the Society of Environmental Journalists' board of directors, was followed by similar queries from other reporters.

A study of SEJ members' experiences with FOIA released today suggests the journalists face a long, frustrating wait - and still may not get the information they're seeking.

Government compliance with FOIA appears to be deteriorating in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to the SEJ report being released today, "A Flawed Tool - Environmental Reporters' Experiences with the Freedom of Information Act."

Volunteers with SEJ's First Amendment Task Force interviewed 55 SEJ members, finding that excessive delays in releasing information are common - with some FOIA requests taking more than a year to fulfill.

Even when documents are turned over, agencies frequently black out huge amounts of information.

In a new twist, agencies have also started refusing in some cases to process a reporter's request until they ponder whether the journalist is entitled to a waiver of search fees - even though such waivers are mandated by the federal statute.

Perhaps even worse, agencies have started requiring journalists to use the cumbersome, time-consuming FOIA process to obtain information once freely disclosed.

Partially because of the problems highlighted, more than half the SEJ members interviewed said they don't use FOIA. The study team targeted investigative reporters in SEJ's ranks. Presumably, FOIA use is even less prevalent among SEJ members generally.

"This report clearly shows that Congress needs to take action to make sure agencies are complying with the Freedom of Information Act, and should set up a system to punish those that aren't," said SEJ President Perry Beeman, who covers environment for The Des Moines Register. "Freedom of information is a basic American right, one that cannot be watered down by the incompetence, arrogance or indifference of bureaucrats."

SEJ urges other journalism groups to undertake similar efforts to document problems with FOIA use.

SEJ members experiencing problems using FOIA should contact the First Amendment Task Force.

EPA officials held a press conference last week to address pollution in New Orleans floodwaters, and late in the week released some water-quality testing results. But they still have not fulfilled the reporters' FOIA request and answer that basic question: Where are dangerous chemicals leaking as a result of Hurricane Katrina?

SEJ is the world's oldest and largest organization of individual working journalists covering environmental affairs. Founded in 1990 and based in Jenkintown, Pa., its membership is composed of more than 1,450 journalists, educators and students dedicated to improving the quality, accuracy and visibility of environmental reporting.

The group's membership guidelines exclude any person paid to lobby or do public relations on any side of environmental issues.

SEJ's report is [here](note: PDF file). Links to the group's letter to EPA and an op-ed by Beeman are [here].

This administration has done more to increase government secrecy than any in recent memory and specificly has gone out of its way to hinder Freedom of Information Act requests. One could wish that in a situation such as this, where many people are being exposed to a toxic soup we could at least learn what the potential dangers are. One could wish...

Brownie falls on his sword

2005-09-12T15:34:00.000-05:00

Just joking, he only resigned.

Can't blame a guy for dreaming.

Oh, say can you [what was that again?]

2005-09-11T21:25:00.000-05:00

Now that the wingnuts have declared war on the image of the crescent, it has become necessary to remove all crescents everywhere lest we be accused of giving aid and comfort to the enemies of America. As such, I present to you:

THE [Newly Revised] BILL OF RIGHTS

Amendments 1-10 of the Onstitution

The Onventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Onstitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misonstrution or abuse of its powers, that further delaratory and restritive lauses should be added, and as extending the ground of publi onfidene in the Government will best insure the benefient ends of its institution;

Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of Ameria, in ongress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses onurring, that the following artiles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the onstitution of the United States; all or any of whih artiles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said onstitution, namely:

Amendment I

Ongress shall make no law respeting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exerise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speeh, or of the press; or the right of the people peaeably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievanes.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being neessary to the seurity of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peae be quartered in any house, without the onsent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be presribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be seure in their persons, houses, papers, and effets, against unreasonable searhes and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable ause, supported by oath or affirmation, and partiularly desribing the plae to be searhed, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a apital, or otherwise infamous rime, unless on a presentment or inditment of a grand jury, exept in ases arising in the land or naval fores, or in the militia, when in atual servie in time of war or publi danger; nor shall any person be subjet for the same offense to be twie put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be ompelled in any riminal ase to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due proess of law; nor shall private property be taken for publi use, without just ompensation.

Amendment VI

In all riminal proseutions, the aused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and publi trial, by an impartial jury of the state and distrit wherein the rime shall have been ommitted, whih distrit shall have been previously asertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and ause of the ausation; to be onfronted with the witnesses against him; to have ompulsory proess for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistane of ounsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at ommon law, where the value in ontroversy shall exeed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fat tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any ourt of the United States, than aording to the rules of the ommon law.

Amendment VIII

Exessive bail shall not be required, nor exessive fines imposed, nor ruel and unusual punishments inflited.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Onstitution, of ertain rights, shall not be onstrued to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the onstitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respetively, or to the people.

Mess with the bull...

2005-09-11T17:24:00.000-05:00

Last week, The Washington Post ran an article questioning where Karl Rove's legal residency is. For a while, he had been claiming his DC house as a homestead and received a tax break on it. However, in order to receive the homestead exemption in DC, you have to be registered to vote in the district and Rove isn't. So he ended up paying $3,400 in back taxes. Seemingly the end of the story (no one seems interested in pursuing the fact that he was claiming two homesteads, which is blatantly illegal).

As a coda to the article, the reporter looked at where Rove is in fact registered to vote, Kerrville; and it turns out that the basis for his registration is the fact that he owns two exceptionally modest rental properties there. So the reporter wanted to find out if this was legal:

Down in Texas, when you register to vote in a place where you don't actually live, the county prosecutor can come after you for voter fraud, said Elizabeth Reyes, an attorney with the elections division of the Texas Secretary of State. Rove's rental cottage "doesn't sound like a residence to me, because it's not a fixed place of habitation," she said. "If it's just property that they own, ownership doesn't make that a residence."

Still, under state law, the definition of a Texan is really pretty loose, Reyes said, even for voting purposes. So someone would have to file a complaint.

In the end, she said, "Questions of residency are ultimately for the court to decide."

Now, based upon this comment, Reyes has been fired.

Elizabeth Reyes, 30, said she was dismissed last week for violating the agency's media policy after she was quoted in a Sept. 3 story by The Washington Post about tax deductions on Rove's homes in Washington and Texas.

Scott Haywood, a spokesman for Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams, confirmed Reyes' firing but wouldn't discuss specifics. He had earlier told the Post that Reyes "was not authorized to speak on behalf of the agency.
"
Reyes told the Post on Friday a superior told her that her bosses were upset about the article. Williams has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Republicans, including President Bush, who relies heavily on Rove for political strategy.

...

"The policy allows us to talk to members of the media," she told the Post. "The policy says if it's a controversial issue or a special issue, it needs to be forwarded on to someone else. Just talking to the media doesn't violate it, as I read it. ... Karl Rove didn't come up. It wasn't something you could classify as controversial."

The initial quote does make it sound as if she were referring to his greasy eminence, but that was due to the writer's choice of wording:

The Post ran a correction Saturday saying Reyes had not been asked about Rove by name and that the story should have mentioned Reyes's further explanation that an individual's intent to return to a home owned in Texas is a primary factor in qualifying for residency.

So not only do the administration's tendrils of power attack people with the audacity to criticize Rove, but if a person's comments might possibly reflect badly upon Rove - even if she wasn't talking about him - she better watch her back.

It's good to know that the administration's using its power for such noble ends.

Via Tim Grieve.

The pansauce plant

2005-09-11T03:00:00.000-05:00

This is my blog, imaged as a plant by OrganicHTML.

Thanks to Jesus' General.

Friday random ten (but it goes to eleven)

2005-09-08T23:16:00.000-05:00

I Wanna Die - Jolie Holland
You Said a Bad Word - Joe Tex
Oh Well - Fiona Apple
Me and Bobby McGee - John Doe
Can the GWOT Save Us? - Kaki King
New Mister Me - Kris Kristofferson
before the eyes of storytelling girls - Anaïs Mitchell
Mack the Kinfe - Louis Armstrong
What's He Building - Tom Waits
Easy Loving - Kelly Hogan And The Pine Valley Cosmonauts
Something Similar - Maria McKee

My mad as hell moment

2005-09-08T11:04:00.000-05:00

I read a lot of politically oriented blogs and quite often they all talk about the same small set of articles. I generally try to avoid doing that. I figure my time is better spent writing about something (or at least some aspect) that you won't read everywhere else. I'm going to ignore my SOP for the the moment. I expect that many other people will write about this exact same issue. Good. 'Cause I'm pissed.

For the past few days, Democrats have been calling for an independent investigation to investigate the response to Hurricane Katrina; one modeled on the bipartisan 9-11 commission. Now in a display of bicameral, unipartisan amity, the Republicans in the House have agreed with the Republicans in the Senate that what they need to do is have a joint House-Senate investigation. In other words they need an investgation in which Democrats are out numbered. Democrats cannot affect the agenda. Democrats will probably not be able to call witnesses unless we can convince some of the specificly chosen Republican committee members to cross over and support us.

You don't need to be precognitive to guess the outcome of this committee: it's all the fault of the state and local officials.

This is BS. There needs to be a fair investigation, one whose results we can trust; but Frist and DeLay (and DeLay's lap dog Hastert) are doing everything they can to prevent a fair investigation from occurring.

Now, I have read a few articles that lead me to question a few of the decisions made by Mayor Nagin. If he made mistakes, so be it. Let them come out too. But a whitewash of this administration's debacle, cannot be allowed to happen.

Via Tim Grieve and many others.

Say the magic words, win a reduced sentence

2005-09-08T10:29:00.000-05:00

Okay, this is the Southeast. I understand that the larger culture in the region tends to be fairly conservative, but do we have to be so ass-backwards that we throw justice completely out of the window. From the Law.com article, 11th Circuit Judge Blasts Colleagues for Sentencing Stance:

A federal appellate judge in Atlanta has blasted district court judges and his own colleagues for "fostering disrespect for the rule of law" in their rulings and statements about criminal sentencing guidelines.

Earlier this year in its ruling on U.S. v. Booker, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that mandatory sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional. Judges had to be allowed to take the facts of the specific case before him into consideration and let those facts affect the sentence that is imposed.

So the question then becomes, what do we do with all of the people who were sentenced prior to that ruling? In some cases, such as the ones covered in this case, the judge specificly stated, "[t]he sentence I am going to impose is not a fair sentence in my view. ... I think Ms. Thompson deserves to be in prison. I don't think she deserves to be imprisoned for 360 months. That's a choice Congress and the government has taken away from the court." In other cases however, the judges - despite what they may have felt - didn't specifly state that the mandatory sentence was unjust.

And that is what this ruling turned on. If your judge said the magic words, "this sentence is unjust" (or words to that effect), then you get to have your sentence reviewed and reduced. But if your judge didn't say that the law sucked, if your judge didn't encourage disrespect for the law, then you lose and your original sentence stands.

In his dissenting opinion, Judge Gerald B. Tjoflat wrote:

"When a judge tells a defendant that his sentence is unjust and unfair, the defendant is inclined to believe him [and may] persist in attacking his sentence on direct appeal," Tjoflat said. "Finally, by openly disparaging the defendant's sentence, the judge fosters disrespect for the rule of law. ... If the judge does not respect the law that he applies, then why should society at large?"

...

"The court's opinion illustrates one of many problems with the Rodriguez standard or, as I coin it, the 'magic words' approach to plain error review," Tjoflat wrote in his Thompson concurrence. "Under Rodriguez, we do not generally reverse a sentence unless the district court has stated on the record that the guideline sentence is too high -- and by implication, unfair and unjust."

The Rodriguez standard, he noted, virtually compels a district judge who is dissatisfied with a sentence "to tell the defendant all about the injustice being done to him so that the defendant can receive the benefit of any subsequent appellate decisions."

This is not the case elsewhere in the country.

Four of the nation's 12 circuit courts, [Ohio State University law Professor Douglas A.] Berman has found, almost automatically grant defendants who were sentenced under mandatory sentencing guidelines prior to the Booker ruling a remand for resentencing, while two others more seek guidance from the sentencing judge.

The members of the 11th Circuit, Berman said in an interview, "seem to be trying their darnedest to make sure the Rodriguezes of the world do not get the benefit of the Booker decision.”

It makes you proud to live in a part of the country where we do everything we can to ensure that justice is not only blind, but cowering in the corner afraid that we're going to beat her like a red headed stepchild.

via TalkLeft

Resources schmee-sources

2005-09-06T23:45:00.000-05:00

So Katrina has just passed. There's devastation all along much of the Gulf Coast. New Orleans has been flooded. So many buildings in that city are burning that the fire department can't fight all of them and has to assess each new one with triage protocols. Many people still have not been found. Many of them need emergency medical attention. FEMA has sent the call out to fire departments all around the country asking for volunteers and large numbers of these brave professionals respond. So what does FEMA have them do?

It has them sit in a day long training session to prepare them to hand out flyers.

"They've got people here who are search-and-rescue certified, paramedics, haz-mat certified," said a Texas firefighter. "We're sitting in here having a sexual-harassment class while there are still [victims] in Louisiana who haven't been contacted yet."

Yes, getting information to the victims of Katrina is important. But couldn't this be done by people who's skills are not so urgently needed elsewhere.

A firefighter from California said he feels ill prepared to even carry out the job FEMA has assigned him. In the field, Hurricane Katrina victims will approach him with questions about everything from insurance claims to financial assistance.

"My only answer to them is, '1-800-621-FEMA,' " he said. "I'm not used to not being in the know."

Many, if not most, of these people don't even have phone service.

The official reason for using the firefighters in this capacity is, "[t]hey already have had background checks and meet the qualifications to be sworn as a federal employee. They have medical training that will prove invaluable as they come across hurricane victims in the field."

The area has been declared a National Disaster. Doesn't that allow the government to cut the red tape and waive the background check? If not, why not? The designation allows other types of red tape to be cut. And what kind of qualifications are necessary to hand out flyers? As for the second reason, they are more likely to utilize their medical training if they were actively participating in search-and-rescue or aiding the New Orleans Fire Department.

And to end with the worst of it all:

Firefighters say they want to brave the heat, the debris-littered roads, the poisonous cottonmouth snakes and fire ants and travel into pockets of Louisiana where many people have yet to receive emergency aid.

But as specific orders began arriving to the firefighters in Atlanta, a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew's first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas.

Update (20050908.1302): More on the story here.

Via Joshua Marshall

My question

2005-09-05T23:55:00.000-05:00

My question for the administration is this:

Why isn't it possible to choke you with your own incompetence?

Happy Labor Day

2005-09-05T15:16:00.000-05:00

Update: Wal-Mart is now asking British officials to limit its major competetor there. From an L.A. Times story:

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the retail giant infamous for crushing competitors and putting mom-and-pop retailers out of business, is now worried that its British rival might be too big.

H. Lee Scott Jr., Wal-Mart's chief executive, told a London newspaper last week that British authorities should be concerned about a retail chain having too much market clout.

Tesco, Britain's largest supermarket, has a 30% share of the food market and is expanding fast, thanks in part to an aggressive discounting program. Wal-Mart-owned Asda Group Ltd., Britain's second-largest retail chain, controls 16% of the market.

"As you get over 30% and higher, I am sure there is a point where government is compelled to intervene, particularly in the U.K., where you have the planning laws that make it difficult to compete," Scott told the Times of London, adding that "at some point, the government has to look at it."

So I guess Wal-Mart is going to divest itself of some of its stores in Canada where "its share of department store sales has risen to 52%, according to Talbot Consultants International, a Toronto-based research firm."

Why do I think this isn't going to happen?

via Kevin Drum.

It's the afterthought that counts

2005-09-05T00:40:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, Bush Minor ordered that government flags be flown at half-mast to honor Rehnquist. Only then did it occur to someone in the White House, 'you know, we still haven't done this for the victims of Katrina,' and - almost a week late - the party-boy in chief has finally issued that order.

Thanks to John Aravosis.

Liberal Blogosphere for Hurricane Relief

2005-09-04T21:47:00.000-05:00

Liberal Blogosphere for Hurricane Relief

(Add to your site)

Hurricane Katrina destroyed thousands of lives.

Together, the liberal blogosphere is raising money for the Red Cross fund for food, water, shelter, and transportation out of the Hurricane Zone.

Please donate now.

I got a letter from my insurance company yesterday and for some reason that's less than clear, I don't have to make a payment this month instead I have to make a double payment next month; which means I can afford to make a donation. It won't be large, but it will be something.

This wonderful administration...

2005-09-04T21:19:00.000-05:00

doing their best to increase the risk of AIDS everywhere.

Uganda became Africa's leader in fighting AIDS by waging an all-fronts war. In 1991, 15 percent of Uganda's adults were infected with the virus. Ten years later the figure was 5 percent. Ugandan officials achieved this drop by bringing the disease out into the open and encouraging people to protect themselves. President Yoweri Museveni called the fight "a patriotic duty." The government and a network of citizens' groups promoted abstinence, faithfulness and consistent condom use.

Now this balanced approach is tilting, and Ugandans will die as a result. The country still prescribes condoms for high-risk groups. But in the last few years, pushed by Washington, it has begun to emphasize abstinence only, for the general population. Washington is moving away from condom advocacy in all its overseas AIDS programs, but Uganda is the only place that this policy has been so fully embraced by the government. Last year at an international AIDS conference, Mr. Museveni gave a blistering speech attacking condoms. Meanwhile, his wife, Janet, has been condemning condom use as immoral and has called for a national census of virgins.

...

Promoting abstinence and faithfulness has been crucial to fighting AIDS in Uganda. But so have free condoms. One of the highest-risk groups is young married women infected by straying husbands. For them, abstinence is not an option, and they are already faithful. They need to be able to protect themselves. Abstinence-only teaching does not work in the United States, and there is no reason to think it will work in Uganda.

Just listen

2005-09-03T02:53:00.000-05:00

It's a slow load, but this is well worth a listen.

An interview with Mayor Nagin.

The word for the day...

2005-09-03T01:50:00.000-05:00

The word for today is circumvallate:

cir·cum·val·late
tr.v. cir·cum·val·lat·ed, cir·cum·val·lat·ing, cir·cum·val·lates
To surround with or as if with a rampart.
adj.

Surrounded with or as if with a rampart.

Anatomy. Surrounded by a ridge or raised, wall-like structure.

circum·val·lation n.

Now, we use it in a sentence:

According to reports from a Red Cross representative, New Orleans has been effectively circumvallated. Relief supplies are not being allowed in, nor are refugees being allowed out.

Friday Random Ten

2005-09-02T14:36:00.000-05:00

God Has Lodged A Tenant In My Uterus - Miss Tammy Faye Starlite And The Angels Of Mercy
Appalachian Boy - Maria McKee
On and On - Bill Monroe and His Bluegrass Boys
Someday Baby - Merle Saunders & Jerry Garcia
Requiem For Mississippi John Hurt - John Fahey
Pancho's Lament - Tom Waits
Right or Wrong - Kelly Hogan
Medley: Sandy On Earth; I'll See You In My Dreams - John Fahey
Windy Bill - Todd Hallawell
Mack the Knife - Louis Armstrong
Amen - Jolie Holland

And one to grow on:

Fishin' Blues - Taj Mahal

Happy birthday, Amanda.

Chock full o' hoot and just a little bit o' nanny

2005-09-01T23:05:00.001-05:00

As previously announced on BoingBoing, Pat Misterovich, the guy who redesigned his mp3 player to make it look like a Pez dispenser has received a liscense from Pez to produce and market it.

I'm on his announcement list, and Pat says they'll be going on sale soon. The people on the list will have the first chance to buy one. So if you're interested, pop on over to his site and sign up.

I'm not sure yet what design(s) he'll be going with, but I assume it'll be one of the classic images so that he doesn't have to worry about getting another liscence from the original rights holder.

Pez mp3

And what were you doing while New Orleans was being decimated?

2005-08-31T20:00:00.000-05:00

Will somebody please tell me what freakin' chords Bush Minor is playing? The best I've been able to come up with are Ab min, 11 maj7 dim5 and Db7 +aug4. You don't think Shrub's some kind of fruity jazz musician, do you? At least Nero knew how to fiddle.

Katrina Relief

2005-08-31T00:58:00.000-05:00

Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to give money to them at this time. I will however be heading over to my local blood donation center later this week.

Give what you can.

Two articles

2005-08-29T23:11:00.000-05:00

Two items linked to on Sunday by Laura Rozen have got me thinking.

The first one is bad enough. Laura asks, "How Kansas is like Pakistan?"

A 14-year-old girl whose 22-year-old husband is charged with sexually assaulting a minor has given birth to their daughter, and the man said he plans to plead not guilty in the case.

The girl became pregnant when she was 13, and her mother gave permission in May for Matthew Koso to take her daughter to Kansas to marry.

Absolutely, Nebraska should be charging Koso with sexual assault of a minor. But why in the hell aren't they charging her parents with conspiracy? Jesus. What the fuck is wrong with these people (the parents, the "husband", Kansas, et alia)?

The other link was about Guatemala's war on women, and in this case I am not using hyperbole. While there are no pictures in the article, I still have to give a warning that the link contains graphic images.

Bodies are appearing at an average of two a day this year: 312 in the first five months, adding to the 1,500 females raped, tortured and murdered in the past four years.

This is out of a population of only 14.6 million (CIA World Factbook).

The article highlights the cases of three people: Manuela Sachaz, Maria Isabel Veliz, and Nancy Peralta (I was going to say women, however Maria was just a girl and Manuela little more), but pretty much any other three would have been just as horrific: rape, torture, murder.

Why is this happening? Just to be clear, the specific people who rape, torture and murder bear the guilt for specific acts; but where there is a culture in which this sort of thing happens with such regularity that Guatemala City is the most dangerous city in the Western Hemisphere "with a per-capita murder rate five times higher than even Bogota in war-torn Colombia," we need to step back and ask why has this culture developed?

The proximate responsibility falls right back on us: from the 50s when Guatemala was the quintessential Banana Republic, to the 80s when it became a proxy war in our campaign against the Soviets, to the present during "which last year alone imported an estimated 84[million] rounds of ammunition" (most sold by US arms manufacturers to fill the US arms we sold them earlier), we have meddled, we have twisted Guatemalan society to suit our short-term goals, and we have left others to pay the long term price. And yes, by and large, the people we put in power in the 80s are still there.

Yes, we did play a significant role in placing the people who support and encourage this culture in power, therefore we bear a portion of responsibility for their actions. "Efrian Rios Montt, the general accused of acts of genocide at the height of the war (charges famously dismissed by the former US president Ronald Reagan as a "bum rap"), subsequently stood for president" is a "'born again Christian' [whose] political comeback was supported by his good friend and spiritual advisor, the 'Rev.' Pat Robertson."

What are we doing to help? Jack saquat. Unless a Western Hemisphere government has a president whose last name is "Chavez" we don't pay attention.

For more resources, check out Amnesty International's Guatemala page.

The new meme thing

2005-08-29T18:18:00.000-05:00

Via Roxanne and Amanda. Go to Music Outfitters, put the year that you graduated from High School in the search
field, then pick "list of the 100 most popular songs". <strike> out the sucky ones and see what you're left with.

Here goes:

~~1. That's What Friends Are For, Dionne Warwick, Elton John, and Gladys Knight~~
~~2. Say You, Say Me, Lionel Richie~~
~~3. I Miss You, Klymaxx~~
~~4. On My Own , Patti Labelle and Michael McDonald~~
5. Broken Wings, Mr. Mister
~~6. How Will I Know, Whitney Houston~~
~~7. Party All The Time, Eddie Murphy~~
~~8. Burning Heart, Survivor~~
9. Kyrie, Mr. Mister
~~10. Addicted To Love, Robert Palmer~~
~~11. Greatest Love Of All, Whitney Houston~~
~~12. Secret Lovers, Atlantic Starr~~
~~13. Friends And Lovers, Carl Anderson and Gloria Loring~~
~~14. Glory Of Love, Peter Cetera~~
15. West End Girls, Pet Shop Boys
~~16. There'll Be Sad Songs, Billy Ocean~~
17. Alive And Kicking, Simple Minds
~~18. Never, Heart~~
19. Kiss, Prince and The Revolution
~~20. Higher Love, Steve Winwood~~
~~21. Stuck With You, Huey Lewis and The News~~
22. Holding Back The Years, Simply Red
23. Sledgehammer, Peter Gabriel
~~24. Sara, Starship~~
~~25. Human, Human League~~
~~26. I Can't Wait, Nu Shooz~~
27. Take My Breath Away, Berlin
~~28. Rock Me Amadeus, Falco~~
~~29. Papa Don't Preach, Madonna~~
~~30. You Give Love A Bad Name, Bon Jovi~~
~~31. When The Going Gets Tough, Billy Ocean~~
~~32. When I Think Of You, Janet Jackson~~
~~33. These Dreams, Heart~~
~~34. Don't Forget Me (When I'm Gone), Glass Tiger~~
~~35. Live To Tell, Madonna~~
~~36. Mad About You, Belinda Carlisle~~
~~37. Something About You, Level 42~~
~~38. Venus, Bananarama~~
~~39. Dancing On The Ceiling, Lionel Richie~~
~~40. Conga, Miami Sound Machine~~
41. True Colors, Cyndi Lauper
~~42. Danger Zone, Kenny Loggins~~
~~43. What Have You Done For Me Lately, Janet Jackson~~
44. No One Is To Blame, Howard Jones
~~45. Let's Go All The Way, Sly Fox~~
~~46. I Didn't Mean To Turn You On, Robert Palmer~~
~~47. Words Get In The Way, Miami Sound Machine~~
48. Manic Monday, Bangles
49. Walk Of Life, Dire Straits
~~50. Amanda, Boston~~
~~51. Two Of Hearts, Stacey Q~~
~~52. Crush On You, Jets~~
53. If You Leave, Orchestral Manoeuvres In The Dark
~~54. Invisible Touch, Genesis~~
55. The Sweetest Taboo, Sade
56. What You Need, INXS
~~57. Talk To Me, Stevie Nicks~~
~~58. Nasty, Janet Jackson~~
~~59. Take Me Home Tonight, Eddie Money~~
~~60. We Don't Have To Take Our Clothes Off, Jermaine Stewart~~
~~61. All Cried Out, Lisa Lisa and Cult Jam With Full Force~~
~~62. Your Love, Outfield~~
~~63. I'm Your Man, Wham!~~
~~64. Perfect Way, Scritti Politti~~
~~65. Living In America, James Brown~~
~~66. R.O.C.K. In The U.S.A., John Cougar Mellencamp~~
~~67. Who's Johnny, El Debarge~~
~~68. Word Up, Cameo~~
~~69. Why Can't This Be Love, Van Halen~~
~~70. Silent Running, Mike and The Mechanics~~
~~71. Typical Male, Tina Turner~~
~~72. Small Town, John Cougar Mellencamp~~
~~73. Tarzan Boy, Baltimora~~
~~74. All I Need Is A Miracle, Mike and The Mechanics~~
~~75. Sweet Freedom, Michael McDonald~~
~~76. True Blue, Madonna~~
~~77. Rumors, Timex Social Club~~
78. Life In A Northern Town, Dream Academy
~~79. Bad Boy, Miami Sound Machine~~
~~80. Sleeping Bag, ZZ Top~~
~~81. Tonight She Comes, Cars~~
~~82. Love Touch, Rod Stewart~~
~~83. A Love Bizarre, Sheila E.~~
~~84. Throwing It All Away, Genesis~~
~~85. Baby Love, Regina~~
~~86. Election Day, Arcadia~~
~~87. Nikita, Elton John~~
~~88. Take Me Home, Phil Collins~~
~~89. Walk This Way, Run-D.M.C.~~
~~90. Sweet Love, Anita Baker~~
~~91. Your Wildest Dreams, Moody Blues~~
~~92. Spies Like Us, Paul McCartney~~
~~93. Object Of My Desire, Starpoint~~
~~94. Dreamtime, Daryl Hall~~
~~95. Tender Love, Force M.D.'s~~
~~96. King For A Day, Thompson Twins~~
~~97. Love Will Conquer All, Lionel Richie~~
~~98. A Different Corner, George Michael~~
~~99. I'll Be Over You, Toto~~
~~100. Go Home, Stevie Wonder~~

Morans

2005-08-28T15:39:00.000-05:00

shamelessly stolen from bluegirlredstate via The Heretik

update: Despite my previous title, this apparently wasn't from Crawford, and may, in fact, have been a prank. Thanks Holly.

Atlanta Pandagoners

2005-08-24T21:14:00.000-05:00

Last week, half-way down the comments on a post about whether or not Bush's spiderhole in Texas should be referred to as a ranch, estate, ranchette or whatever, it became apparent that a goodly number of us lived in Atlanta and annejumps suggested that those of us who do get together sometime. Well, one thing led to another, and while some e-mail addresses were exchanged, we didn't get contact information from everybody who expressed an interest.

So, if you are a person who lives somewhere within driving distance of Atlanta and would be interested in meeting up with other Pandagoners, leave a comment with your address or just shoot me an e-mail.

More specificly though, I'd like to suggest our first meeting. Every year on Labor Day weekend, the Starlite Drive-In on Moreland holds Drive-Invasion, a festival of good music, bad movies, and fun, fun, fun.

I was planning on going Sunday (Sept 4th) and I thought that other people might enjoy it too. If this doesn't work for you (it is Labor Day weekend and all), but you'd still like to meet other Pandagoners in Atlanta, let me know. We'll work it out.

It marches in a liquid manner

2005-08-22T16:04:00.000-05:00

Last year, our Dear Leader informed us that freedom is on the march in the Middle East. Now however, Bush Minor has changed his metaphor and, "The tide of freedom ebbs and flows, but it is moving in a clear direction, and freedom's tide is rising in the broader Middle East." You know what they call a rising tide? A flow tide. So freedom is moving in a clear direction, then by his analogy it will stop and clearly move in the other direction.

We sent our soldiers to die so that freedom could march back and forth across the parade ground like a plebe with too many demerits? Excuse me, I think I'm gonna be seasick.

via Tim Grieve

We hold these truths to be self-evident

2005-08-22T14:55:00.000-05:00

that Liberal Bloggers are the eyes and ears of intelligent world. Just take Asian Security as one of many examples:

Liberal bloggers are so completely aware of the latest moves by China to shore up support in South Asia, it's not even funny. And now, with China's overtures towards Russia, things are starting to look bad for US strategic interests in the region. I mean, GOD, how can anyone doubt us liberal bloggers when we suggest that India, China and Russia could end up joining forces to form the scariest triumverate since Ann Coulter's three-way with Rush and O'Reilly?

Do you see such inciteful analysis come from the religiofascist reichwing bloggers? I think not. But more than that though, not only are we smarter, but as Preemptive Karma so brilliantly deduces:

As you are no doubt aware, the vast majority of liberals are superior intellectually, morally, financially and sexually to conservatives. All liberals are better looking than conservatives. This is of course due to the fact that conservatives keep having to pull their heads out of their asses. Creates wrinkles, you know.

Only among the liberal blogger underground can you read the truth, my friends. Keep the faith.

1, 2, 3 Who are we voting for? Don't ask me, I voted on a Diebold machine.

2005-08-22T01:12:00.000-05:00

Following the 2004 election, I didn't believe that there had been a systematic attempt to alter votes. Certainly Black Box Voting had reported potential problems with electronic voting, but the evidence - both direct as well as statistical - was equivocal at best. Since then however, new facts just keep rolling in. In a story about the special election for San Diego Mayor:

Nearly 50 percent of all voters participated in the parallel election, which included five polling places representing 11 precincts. The sample included more conservative than liberal precincts, with participation as high among Republicans as among Democrats. The tandem election results showed what most feel to be startling results. "There is a shift of four percent of the vote, consistently," Joe Prizzi, (engineer and physicist,) reported at a press conference held by CAPE [Citizens Audit Parallel Election] in front of City Hall. Frye received 50.2 percent of the votes cast in the parallel election - enough for an outright victory if those results reflect the outcome citywide. CAPE also found that the official count added approximately 2 percent to each of Frye's two Republican opponents, Jerry Sanders and Steve Francis. In addition, CAPE examined the only other ballot measure, a proposition over a war memorial cross on public land. The proposition's vote total also appeared to have been padded by 4 percent in the official election tally, which was certified Friday August 19 by San Diego County's newly appointed Registrar of Voters, Republican Mikel Haas. A team of statisticians from California State University- Northridge - have analyzed the data from CAPE, concluding that the probability of luck or chance as the cause of the observed four percent deviation is less than one in 1,300 - or .000678.

CAPE isn't the only group to accuse [San Diego Registrar Mikel] Haas of withholding public information. Jim March of Black Box Voting and a Republican maintains that the Registrar refused his request during the election to obtain audit logs, which would show whether records were kept of each user who accessed the Diebold GEMS central tabulator. In an interview with the East County Californian before the election, Haas stated that he would allow citizens to observe the central tabulator counting votes. But on election night, March found the tabulator screen had been placed eight feet away, behind glass and readable only through binoculars, literally. According to March, an activist who was with him brought binoculars and was able to clearly make out the screen. March's request to have the screen moved closer was refused, so he entered the secured tabulating room.

This is just riduculous. If we can't have faith that our ballots will be honestly counted, then democracy is nothing but a pretty word.

So now we know

2005-08-21T13:23:00.000-05:00

Well, we finally learn what the Noble Purpose for which Casey Sheehan and other military personnel from the US, Britain, and our allies sacrificed their lives. It was to make sure that Iraq became a properly Islamic country (from the National Review Online, for heaven's sake):

In the desperation to complete an Iraqi constitution – which can be spun as a major step of progress on the march toward democratic nirvana – the United States of America is pressuring competing factions to accept the supremacy of Islam and the fundamental principle no law may contradict Islamic principles.

I feel so much better now.

Ionic, Doric or Corinthian?

2005-07-14T11:13:00.000-05:00

Marie Jon', the person who founded PeoplePolitical.org responded to my last post stating that she was aware of the problem and that it would be corrected as soon as her web developer returned. (He suffered a family tragedy, and I wish him the best.) She then gave me links to two articles explaining her political philosophy. This first one was written by her:

Very Bad Politics

The Fifth Column/Marie Jon'

June 11-12, 2005 - With each passing day, the Democrats prove once again that they are primarily interested in furthering their efforts to hurt the President of the United States. In doing so they seem totally indifferent to the fact that such efforts hurt America period!

Who can argue that Democrats are continuing to politicize a war on terror that took our troops to Afghanistan and ultimately to Iraq, or that this politicization is not only making the war more difficult for those troops, but also emboldening America’s enemies to continue the fight worldwide?

There are two relationships between the invasion of Iraq and the war on terror: (1) Despite a lack of corroborating evidence, the administration (sometimes implicitly and sometimes through the corner of their mouth) incorrectly claimed a direct connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 hijackers; and (2) the invasion of Iraq has been of inestimable value to al-Qaeda in the recruitment and training of new terrorists.

Our country is in no way immune to further attacks that could conceivably end up being far worse than 9/11.

Absolutely, which is why we should have continued the hunt for Bin Laden and other top ranking al-Qaeda operatives, instead of diverting resources from this goal to the unrelated invasion of Iraq.

Yet as a country we are clearly weakened by our internal divisions. And this is because the Democrats regularly display their unfounded opposition to the war, in an effort to exploit it for political gain.

The internal divisions to which you refer are more commonly known as the democratic process, and (as noted above) opposition to the war is hardly unfounded.

Much has been written about the far-left beliefs of the modern Democrat political leadership. Their ideologies are based in a heartfelt disdain for such time-honored values as patriotism and traditional morality. Their words are insulting, stinging and just plain nasty and disrespectful.

The Democratic political leadership is hardly monolithic. Similar to the Republican leadership, different Democratic politicians act for different reasons. Speaking for myself however, I do not consider it to be patriotic to lie to the country, and its military personnel, in order to send our soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen into a war of choice.

Howard Dean says much about the Democrat National Committee, which he chairs. I do my share of reading and listening. With each new attack on the war effort, and with each new effort to sidetrack the country from the necessary work of winning that war, less doubt is left in the minds of the American people as to where the far left is coming from.

The liberals who dominate the Democrat party have no new or worthwhile ideas for the betterment of this country. On virtually every occasion presented to them, they simply do and say anything they think they need to say in order to sway their base constituents.

Base constituents don’t need swaying. That’s why they’re considered base constituents. The group that either party tries to sway is the swing voters.

Do they really think the country could be made safer, or its best interests served, by hurling constant accusations that the president “deliberately misled” or “lied to the American people? Such allegations prove that they believe they are lofty thinkers and are somehow intellectually and morally superior to those who recognize the mortal threat facing America, and the need to forcibly confront it. They may believe they are good Americans, but history conclusively proves that in the long run, the country has little to gain, and much to risk, from the proliferation of such thinking.

When an action by the administration reduces the security of the American people, and leads to the unnecessary deaths of our military personnel, pointing out that the administration not only is responsible for that action, but also lied in order to convince us that that action was mandatory is the patriotic duty of every American. Hoping that the government would think twice and act honestly before sending our military into harm’s way is not lofty thought, it’s a moral necessity.

I am the average Jane that lives next door, who sees America not from the standpoint of lofty intellectuals, but according to the long-standing principles of virtue and truth on which the country was based. I express what I do understand.

Making pleas to anti-intellectualism? Do you feel that your argument is so weak that it cannot stand on its own feet?

I understand that America is in big trouble politically and in other areas, such as its crumbling social environment. Politically, the Democrats have engaged in efforts on these fronts that do not improve things, but consistently work to aggravate virtually every one these dangerous conditions. To put it bluntly, they couldn’t be doing a worse job of dealing with these problems, if they had actually taken to being seditious.

Who can honestly argue that by focusing on problems with America’s military efforts, they are actually undermining our security in the war on terror. They diminish America’s standing among foreign leaders, both friend and foe, by constantly showing their disrespect for the man America elected into office.

You might want to re-consider your wording in these paragraphs. They are murky at best. Perhaps it would be useful if you were to have a fellow-traveler with editing experience blue pencil them.

Democrats in high positions have expressed nothing short of hostility while speaking about this president. Can the morale of America’s enemies be anything but boosted by such actions?

A vibrant opposition party is a necessary part of any fully functioning democratic government. Are you suggesting that we should surrender our democratic ideals because of the reaction of terrorists?

Some claim to be Christians and loyal patriots, but their words lead you to believe otherwise. Were their actions consistent with their words, they would be working in harmony with President Bush for the betterment of this country. Yet on every occasion, they seem to be dedicated to doing quite the opposite. Their acts and their deeds are willfully planned to be disruptive. It used to be that, in a time of war, such actions would be branded as “sedition.” That type of behavior ultimately hurts you and me, the average Joe and Jane and our families.

When the actions of the President not only do not better the country, but in fact increase the potential for harm to befall it, then it is the duty of loyal patriots to oppose those actions.

As I plan for my future, I must consider the political alternatives available to me from a standpoint of what will make the country freer, stronger, safer, and more prosperous as the years go by. From everything I have observed among the present-day Democrat leadership, none of their key players have an interest in what is best for America, and thus, none of them are worthy of my vote.

The power of christ compelled me

2005-07-13T22:45:00.000-05:00

The site PeoplePolitical.org (Where it's ok to be RIGHT) has the following link image on it:

Although normally, I try to avoid doing this. The power of christ compelled me to write them the following e-mail:

The tag line on your petition ad reads, "These 12 people can have a serious impact on your life."

There are only 9 Supreme Court Justices (or 10 if you count Scalia twice). You could probably tell this if you bothered to look at the picture below the caption and count.

Thanks to Sadly, No!

Update (20050714.1130): A friend pointed out to me that the London bombings occurred on the day after the awarding of the Olympics to that city, not the day before. I should have mocked that too; my bad.

Happy Independence Day

2005-07-02T20:24:00.000-05:00

Okay, here's where I get my iconoclast card punched. Instead of two days hence, we should be celebrating today, July 2nd, as our independence day.

On this day in 1776, the Congressional Congress voted that the colonies should be independent from Great Britain. I consider this vote to be the important one, the one that should be celebrated; not the one two days later agreeing to the specific wording of the Declaration of Independence, nor the date in August when the Declaration was signed.

So everybody,
Happy Independence Day

(and for my friends still living in the mother country - no hard feelings)

I Give Up

2005-06-30T19:50:00.000-05:00

I do. I freakin' give up. I was willing to accept when the History Channel was actually the World War II channel. It's not my favorite part of history; but it is important, there's lots film to work with, and I imagine it suits their demographic to a "T".

But that was then, this is now:

8:00pm	UFO Files TVPG, CC
9:00pm	UFO Files TVPG, CC
10:00pm	Modern Marvels (ET Tech) TVPG, CC
11:00pm	Alien Abductions TVPG, CC

And this is by no means unusual, every night this week the 8:00 show is UFO Files.

Don't get me wrong, there are reasonable arguments to be made that intelligent, non-human civilizations exist elsewhere in the universe. The odds for it are suggestive, though not indicative. Last week and the week before, NOVA showed a four part series called, Origins, which included an episode on the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence. But that's a world away from abduction stories about E.T. with an anal probe.

Is it too much to ask that the History Channel be about - I don't know - History?

Thoughts on the Democratic message

2005-06-24T01:45:00.000-05:00

EMILY's List has just released their most recent Women's Monitor poll, and the news for Democrats in it is heartening. Since the 2004 election there has been a massive shift(about 20 percentage points) in the attitudes of women against the Republican party. While this is good news, it's important to remember that the mid-term election is still 16 months away, and in politics that's a lifetime.

Digging a bit deeper this poll, as well as other recent ones, gives Democrats running for Congress some useful themes around which to craft their message. Here are a few thoughts that I in exploring these themes:

Abortion rights needs to be subsumed into an overarching support for privacy rights. I am by no means suggesting that abortion rights should be abandoned or curtailed; however, while most people (including most women) support some controls over abortion, general privacy rights are viewed much more favorably.

[W]omen...believe that Republicans have overstepped the bounds on issues of privacy and on the relationship between religion and science. Even women who are uncomfortable with abortion rights do not believe strongly that government should dictate morality or that scientific progress should be proscribed by religion.

I would suggest framing the issue like this:

The government should not be forcing the morality of a small minority on the whole nation. If a person honestly believes that embryonic stem cell research is immoral, then let them choose to forego the benefits that may come from it; but don't impose on the rest of us a ban on potential cures for a range of devistating diseases, from Parkinsons to Alzheimers to cancer, and many more.

If a person believes that medical care and life support should be continued in all circumstances, even beyond all hope for recovery, then let them decide that for themselves; but others who believe differently and tell this to their spouse and family, or put this in a Living Will, should be allowed to decide for themselves when their life should be allowed to end naturally and peacefully.

If a person believes that birth control is immoral, no one is forcing them to use it. However, when a woman and her doctor decide that birth control is right for her, no one should be allowed to step between them and insert their own morality instead.
The war in Iraq and terrorism are currently polling at a lower priority than they were in the Presidental election. It's important to remember that this can change on a dime. In addition, I would recommend having a strong position on this because Rove's Rule does have validity - attack your opponent where he is strongest.

The Democrats have consistently been on the losing side of this issue and there is no reason for that, we need to reframe the debate on this issue: The war in Iraq has made us more vulnerable to terrorism, not less; more vulnerable to rogue nations, not less.

The administration has gotten us into this awful mess in Iraq: making us less safe, costing the lives of our brave military men and women, costing us hundreds of billions of dollars, and decimating our credibility around the world - credibility that necessary for cooperation to prevent international terrorism. We now need people in Congress who are willing to clean up that mess.

As we have become increasingly aware over the past several months, the Bush administration lied to the country, and lied to Congress, in order to drag us into a war that makes us less secure against international terrorism. Instead of continuing the hunt for Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida we diverted resources to attack a country that was a long-term threat at best. Our country faces many threats around the world, but the Bush adminstration lied so that we would wastefully attack a minor threat while leaving several greater threats un heeded.

The administration ignored military advice, went in with too few troops, and didn't plan for the occupation that we are now stuck in. Because we didn't have the manpower, hundreds of tons of high-explosives kept by Saddam's regieme could not be secured and are now being used everyday to kill our troops, Iraqi security forces, and thousands upon thousands of civilians.

As Afghanistan was in the 1980's, Iraq has now become the training ground for a whole new generation of terrorists; and when this war is finally over they will spread around the middle east and the world practicing their deadly trade against civilians everywhere.

And we, the country that should be a shining beacon of justice and hope, have decended to the depths of torturer and pariah.

As will be pointed out, many current Democratic members of Congress voted in support of invading Iraq. There is no need to equivocate. The Bush adminstration lied. That is why we are there.
Under the guise of "values" issues, the Republicans will try to bring up gay marriage. The focus has to be changed to civil unions. Personally, I support gay marriage. I absolutely believe that it is right. However, the majority of the country disagrees with me. What the majority does support is civil unions and the focus on gay marriage is hurting that middle step.

Last election, in every state in which an "anti-gay marriage" amendment was on the ballot, that amendment passed. What is worse is that in most cases, those amendments not only banned gay marriage but also eliminated civil unions. At the moment in most places, gay marriage is too much to ask, civil unions are not.

I would suggest using language like this:

Around the country, loving couples are unable to visit one another in the hospital. Around the country, loving couples are unable to leave their worldly possessions to each other. Around the country, loving couples are discriminated against in a thousand small ways. This is not right. This is not how we should treat each other.
Healthcare is an issue that plays well for the Democrats. We are trusted on this issue more than Republicans. We should take our strength and increase it by playing up the fact that Healthcare reform is pro-business, as well as pro-family.

Right now, Healthcare costs are a huge drag on the companies that employ us and drive our economy. General Motors, for example, has announced that they are laying off 25,000 workers in no small part due to the rise in healtcare costs. So not only are each of us having to pay higher and higher prices for healthcare, but many of us are also losing our jobs because of this problem putting the health and security of our families in ever greater risk.

In addition, because of the Republicans, Medicare is not allowed to negotiate with drug companies for the best prices. Who pays for this windfall for the drug companies? You do. I do. Our parents and grandparents do. It is more important to the Republicans that drug company money continues flowing into their campaign coffers than the fact that our seniors are being bled dry by these corporate pirates.
Social Security is currently a significant strength for the Democrats and the Republicans are beginning to shun it.

As long as the status quo remains superior to any of the Republicans attempts to gut the our social saftey net, there is no need to change our strategy. To the extent that comment on the issue is necessary, I'd suggest something like this:

The Democrats have sworn to protect Social Security from the predations of this administration, and we will continue to do this until the Republians finally realize that our saftey net to protects all of us. It needs to be strengthened, not removed.
And finally the issue that Democrats are most trusted on: the Environment. We need to call out the adminstration for being environmentalists in name only.

The Bush administration has not only ignored the advice of their own scientists, the administration has rewritten those scientists' conclusions to suit their corporate donors.

They call themselves environmentalists but this administration's Clear Skies bill eviscerates pollution controls and lead to more lung disease, more deaths. They call themselves environmentalists but they increase the amount of mercury that is allowed in our drinking water. They call themselves environmentalists but the Healthy Forests Initiative gifts our national forests to private businesses. They are not environmentalists, they have never been environmentalists, and until they realize that our life, our health and our world demand good stewardship on our part, they will never be environmentalists.

These are my suggestions. I am a Democrat. I know that our positions are better for our country than what the Republicans are trying to foist upon us, but unless we stop bearing our throats and fight back, issue by issue, we will never be able to prove it.

The New New Torture

2005-06-23T17:05:00.000-05:00

Fred Clark says it better than I could. Again.

Here's what I believe:

I believe that torture itself is dishonorable. I believe that failing to condemn torture is dishonorable. I believe that condoning the practice of torture empowers our enemies and puts American lives at risk. And I believe that by embracing the immoral, counterproductive and utterly un-American practice of torture we make America more closely resemble the kinds of infamous and evil regimes we ought never to resemble in the slightest.

I believe that those who defend the practice of torture lessen America. I believe that the condemnation of those who condemn torture lessens America. I believe that Joseph Darby is a great American and that Jeremy Sivits is not.

But I can't believe that we've fallen so far that I actually have to say all these things. I can't believe that we have reached the point where statements like "Torture is bad" and "It is good to condemn torture" are seen as controversial.

A United States Senator spoke the truth. He condemned evil and called it un-American. And then he was forced to apologize.

Jesus God.

His whole post is worth a read and he follows it up with a post explaining what you can do about it.

I've just written to my Representative and Senators in support of the respective bills. I would encourage everyone else to do the same.

Random Ten - now with new grading action

2005-06-18T17:14:00.000-05:00

The latest variation on the Friday random ten is to grade the coolness of the songs that are on your list. Amanda at Pandagon does it following up on posts from Norbizness and Lauren at Feministe.

I argued in the comments on Pandagon that one cannot judge how cool one's own music is, that can only be done by others. So feel free to grade my random selection on the Feministe Scale of Coolness (1 being wack and 10 being bitchin’). Top and bottom scores for each song will be dropped and the average will be how cool I am this week.

Let 'er rip:

Aimee Mann - She Really Wants You (download from linked page)
Peter Mulvey - Here In the Going Going Gone (couldn't find a copy, sorry)
The Duhks - Death Came a Knockin' (Real Audio format)
Miss Tammy Faye Starlite - Highway 69 (clip from eMusic)
Leo Kottke - Busted Bicycle (clip from eMusic)
Anaïs Mitchell - I Wear Your Dress (mp3 download)
John Doe (with Dave Alvin and Grant Lee Philips) - Heartless (clip from eMusic)
Kaki King - Happy as a Dead Pig in the Sunshine (couldn't find a copy, sorry)
Natalie Farr - Little Girl (Real Audio format)
John Fahey - The Great Santa Barbara Oil Slick (couldn't find a copy, sorry)

My Sunday morning story

2005-06-16T21:37:00.000-05:00

Over at Pandagon Amanda Marcotte has written several highly commented posts on the way that society blames rape victims ( and ). As part of this she mentioned that she has read many woment bloggers posting their experiences, but no men. This is what I put in the comments to the second post:

Okay, here's my story.

I was probably around 12 or 13, but I was always small for my age so I looked younger. On Friday and Saturday nights, my friends and I would converge on one of our homes and play D&D, or some similar game, until the sun came up. It was about a five mile walk back to our respective homes in the morning and three of us, who lived near each other, would take the walk back together.

I can't remember why, but one Sunday morning I had to walk back by myself. By the time I was two-thirds the way home I was tired and bored and when some guy I'd never met before asked me if I wanted a lift, I said yes.

At first everything seemed okay: I was a bit nervous and realized that I probably shouldn't've accepted the ride, but he seem okay. Then he takes a wrong turn. I point this out to him, and he makes another turn into an industrial park and pulls over.

He then exposed himself and asked me to expose myself as well. I refused and he pulled out what appeared to be a gun. He asked me again and I refused. He last asked me what I would do if he shot me.

Different people react to stressful situations in different ways. I dont' believe that there is a single right way for people to react. I tend to become hyperfocused. There was a gun in front of me and that's pretty much what I was paying attention to. Perhaps there were people around who could have helped if I yelled. I don't know.

What I did say was that, if he shot me, I would probably die. That turned out to be the magic phrase. I impressed him enough, or it had just been an idle thought for him and he didn't expect resistence, or whatever; he let me go. My resistence could have just as easily angered him and I very likely could have died.

As he unlocked the door, he said that the gun was only a cigarette lighter. I don't know, it looked real to me.

Did I do something foolish? Yes, for me to walk the five miles along a busy highway at 6:30 Sunday morning wasn't among the brightest things I've ever done. But it shouldn't have been foolish. I should have been able to make that walk without worrying about pedophiles, rapists or whatever. Anyone should. And at any time one of the people involved in any physical situation says, "no," then that's where it should end.

Maybe we could resurrect FDR?

2005-06-16T16:18:00.000-05:00

Various Republican members of the House have introduced a joint resolution to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. The one which limits Presidents to two terms.

The timing is interesting since Bush's numbers are lower than they've ever been. However, it's always good to remember that those fluctuate and it's never too soon to prevent a third term for Bush Minor.

Thanks to Sisyphus Shrugged for the heads up.

Baby steps

2005-06-16T15:48:00.000-05:00

An Alabama State Representative has asked his attourney general to look into money that was funneled into the state, in particular to Ralph Reed's firm, to fight a proposed lottery. The money was initially reported to have come from a Washington DC group, but it has recently been revealed that that group was just a channel for money from Indian casinos.

According to Rep. Hinshaw this is a violation of Alabama state law which prohibits making donations in someone else's name.

The story is here.

For those who don't know, Ralph Reed, former head of the Christian Coalition and now running to the post of Lieutenant Governer of Georgia, is smack dab in the middle of the Indian Gaming scandal that is threatening to sink certain members of the Republican party.

Bull Moose tends to be the go-to source for information on this particular scandal, with this post being the most recent on the topic that I've found.

Strange Fruit (revisited)(revisited)

2005-06-15T17:49:00.000-05:00

In an update to yesterday's post about Chambliss' failure to co-sponsor the Anti-Lynching resolution.

Turns out he decided to ask for a do-over and had his name added to the list of co-sponsors after the resolution had pass.

It makes one proud to think of one's Senators skating by with a good D-.

What's so (honkin') funny 'bout peace, love and understanding

2005-06-15T16:46:00.000-05:00

The Supreme Court has previously ruled that nude dancing is a form of protected speech. So isn't it just common sense that honking your car's horn in support of a weekly protest should also be protected? Not only is it making a statement (support for the protesters) but since the statement is political (protesting against the war), the honking is worthy of the greatest level of protection that we give to speech under the first amendment. Unfortunately the police in Tiburon, CA have different ideas.

"We have been picketing for a long time. All of a sudden the police are out there trying to stop the honks," said peacenik Melvin Fiske, a corporal in the Marines during World War II. "We assume honking is as American as (apple) pie. If people want to applaud our actions it is their right to do that."

Tiburon Police Capt. Dave Hutton said excessive honking is an "unlawful use of horn" and officers are simply doing their job.

So, any bets on how long it'll take before the court throws these tickets out?

I know a bit about Biology

2005-06-15T16:20:00.000-05:00

Well, it looks like the Georgia Board of Education can do something right after all. As reported in the AJC, the board rejected a Parental Notification rule that would have required parents to sign permission slips before their child could join a school club; in effect it would have required gay, lesbian or simply confused kids to either out themselves to their parents or not seek help and support from their peers.

The 10-3 decision cheered opponents, who felt the policy would deter gay students from joining support clubs.

Beth Littrell, a staff attorney with the Georgia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said public schools have no right to prohibit students from joining clubs, even at the request of parents. "In our opinion, [it's] a violation of the student's First Amendment rights," Littrell said.

Those who have been keeping up with Zach's plight know all too well what can happen when a teenager comes out to a parent, and the parent is monumentally unsupportive.

Kudos to the GBE.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles...

2005-06-15T14:10:00.000-05:00

I was staying up late last night when I realized that Turner Classic Movies was showing 20 Million Miles to Earth as part of their Science Fiction Films of the Cold War Tuesdays. When I was a kid I used to love this movie in a completely non-ironic, would watch it a hundred times, way.

But some time since then, my innocence was shattered. Oh sure, if you'd asked me then what I liked the most about it, I would have said, "the special effects," and, absolutely, Ray Harryhausen's work is great. But sometime between then and now I began caring about the plot, and the characters, and the dialog, and the acting - those little things.

Actually, I think I can date when I began to care. It was in '82 or '83 when Paul Mazursky's Tempest first came to HBO. Granted, I liked this film because when I initially saw it, I developed a huge crush on Molly Ringwald. To express my love for her, I watched the movie over and over and slowly started paying attention to the movie as a whole. I came to appreciate that movie for what it was, and learned that I could like many different types of films. Molly Ringwald took my innocence from me (of course, you could also say that Paul Mazursky took my innocence, but that just leads to a scary visual place).

So anyway, I was watching 20 Million Miles, and it occurred to me how bad - how truly atrocious - the movie was. Just as an example, about a third of the way into the movie Ymir, the monster from Venus, has escaped and is being tracked by Col. Calder and a few other people. They come across Ymir hiding in a barn just after it's killed a dog, and Calder says, "He's actually docile unless threatened." And just to prove his point, the Colonel proceeds to poke at the creature with a big stick.

A bit later I'm still sitting there watching, half laughing my butt off and half just agog that I used to think this was good, when the thought came to me that if I had any faith whatsoever in the talent of the screenwriters that the whole thing could be seen as a cautionary tale of Imperial hubris. Not just is everything bad that happens, everything, America's fault; but if we'd bothered for one moment to pay attention to the concerns of the locals, it could have been nipped in the bud.

First, we go to Venus without telling anyone. I'm not sure why our scientific leap forward should have been kept a secret, but there you go. However since it was classified, when the rocket goes off course during re-entry, we can't exactly ask for help locating it and, of course, we don't warn anyone about the potentially hazardous cargo it's carrying.

Surprise, surprise that hazardous cargo, the Venusian monster Ymir, escapes. Initially, the Italian authorities go along with the US' plan to capture it, but following the incident with the stick and the poking that I mentioned above, which ended with a local being mauled, the Italians say, "bugger that, we're killing the beast." They are reasonably concerned that this creature is going to go on a rampage and kill lots of natives.

The Americans though wheedle, argue and beg, until the Italians give in allowing the American's one last chance to capture it. The GIs do, but shockingly enough while they're studying it Ymir escapes again. Hello, the 20 foot-tall creature is only sedated by a precisely regulated electric current, and it doesn't occur to the government to keep a back-up generator around?

So, the monster's out again, killing Italians and tearing up ancient Roman architecture, before finally the Italians are allowed to do what they should have done in the first place and put the poor thing out of its misery.

All in all, this could be seen as a subversive critique of American arrogance. Unfortunately, I don't have faith in the writers and have to conclude that the story just sucks.

After 20 Million Miles, TCM showed The Blob, about which I have only two points:

This move has the absolute funniest theme song ever. I've never been a fan of Burt Bacharach (nor Mack David either, but who cares about him), but I figured, 'if Elvis Costello, one of the coolest people to exist on this planet, does a duet with him, perhaps he's worth a second listen.' Screw that. I don't care if he went on to become the next Norman Borlaug, saving the lives of a Billion people; to me he would always remain the man who wrote the Theme to The Blob
Steve McQueen is supposed to be a teenager? He makes Beverly Hills 90210 era Luke Perry look like a toddler.

Okay, I lied, I have one more thing. It looks like some idiot is shelling out money for (yet another) remake of this movie, and this time it's been written by the same people who penned this years regurgitation of House of Wax. Oh, joy.

Strange Fruit (revisited)

2005-06-14T18:25:00.000-05:00

Earlier today, Majikthise put up a list of the twenty US Senators who refused to co-sponsor the Anti-Lynching resolution that was passed yesterday, and what a shock, one of the ones from my state was on the list.

In the comments, one reader suggested that we bug these people until we find out why they weren't willing to take even this small step to atone for the Senate's failure to pass anti-lynching legislation half a century ago.

Well, here's me doing my little bit:

Dear Senator Chambliss,

I was wondering why you were only one of twenty Senators who not only refused to co-sponsor yesterday's anti-lynching resolution, but also refused a roll-call vote.

Granted the apology has come at least fifty years too late, but what is wrong with this small measure.

Yours,
Charles Smith

I'll let you know if I hear anything back.

I'm dreaming of a white Christian

2005-06-14T17:40:00.000-05:00

If it's at all unclear about whom Dean was referring when he called the GOP "a white Christian party", Chris Hedges writes about them in the latest issue of Harper's Magazine.

In his article Soldiers of Christ II: Feeling the hate with the National Religious Broadcasters, Hedges reports on the most recent NRB convention in Anaheim, CA. Much of the article deals with the mundanities that you might expect from a convention of ultra-right wing religious types, but to provide a bit of context, Hedges includes a bit of background to describe these people and their goals:

What the disparate sects of this movement, known as Dominionism, share is an obsession with political power. A decades-long refusal to engage in politics at all following the Scopes trial has been replaced by a call for Christian “dominion” over the nation and, eventually, over the earth itself. Dominionists preach that Jesus has called them to build the kingdom of God in the here and now, whereas previously it was thought that we would have to wait for it. America becomes, in this militant biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America’s Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan. Under Christian dominion, America will no longer be a sinful and fallen nation but one in which the Ten Commandments form the basis of our legal system, Creationism and “Christian values” form the basis of our educational system, and the media and the government proclaim the Good News to one and all. Aside from its proselytizing mandate, the federal government will be reduced to the protection of property rights and “homeland” security.[When George W. Bush was first elected, Pat Robertson resigned as head of the Christian Coalition, a sign to many that Bush was the first in an expected line of regents that will herald the coming of the Messiah.] Some Dominionists (not all of whom accept the label, at least not publicly) would further require all citizens to pay “tithes” to church organizations empowered by the government to run our social-welfare agencies, and a number of influential figures advocate the death penalty for a host of “moral crimes,” including apostasy, blasphemy, sodomy, and witchcraft. The only legitimate voices in this state will be Christian. All others will be silenced.

The traditional evangelicals, those who come out of Billy Graham’s mold, are not necessarily comfortable with the direction taken by the Dominionists, who now control most of America’s major evangelical organizations, from the NRB to the Southern Baptist Convention, and may already claim dominion over the Christian media outlets. But Christians who challenge Dominionists, even if they are fundamentalist or conservative or born-again, tend to be ruthlessly thrust aside.

These are a group of people who have a guiding voice in Republican politics and want to remake the U.S. into a Christian Fascist state.

After the Schiavo mess earlier this year, I read many people saying that these people had finally jumped the shark, and indeed Kevin Drum is predicting that their over-reaching will work for us next Presidential election. It is way too soon to make an accurate prediction about what will happen to this movement and that race, and to the extent that such expectations encourage complacency they are dangerous.

* * *

Also worth reading is the first article in the series Soldiers of Christ I: Inside America's most powerful megachurch by Jeff Sharlet, and the follow up story by Non-Prophet about how questioning Pastor Ted of the New Life Church with respect to Sharlet's article got a congregant excommunicated.

Here a geek, there a geek, ...

2005-06-14T01:38:00.000-05:00

So, following up on my last post in which I said that John Adams was a geek, I've decided that as I read through the American History series, I'm going to create a list of Presidential Geeks.

Just to state, being a geek is not a bad thing, in fact I wear it as a badge of honor; however since gladhandling has generally been considered both manditory for a President and anathema for a geek, I think its worthwhile to make a list of those people who have broken the mold.

As a preliminary list, I'm inclined to include both John Adams and his son, John Quincy Adams, as geeks; as well as Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, Wilson, Nixon, and Carter. I'm sure they're more and some of my initial suggestions might be knocked off the list.

If you have any suggestions, or feel that my preliminary list is in error, let me know. I'll discuss each one as I come to him in my reading before I develop any sort of final list.

What I did on my vacation (for the last ten years)

2005-06-13T17:21:00.000-05:00

My Summer reading list:

The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of It's Sacred Texts by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman
Page Smith's American History series:
- A New Age Now Begins : A People's History of the American Revolution, V. 1
- A New Age Now Begins : A People's History of the American Revolution, V. 2
- The Shaping of America : A People's History of the Young Republic , V. 3
- The Nation Comes of Age : A People's Hisotry of the Ante-Bellum Years , V. 4
- Trial by Fire : A People's History of the Civil War and Reconstruction, V. 5
- The Rise of Industrial America : A People's History of the Post-Reconstruction, V. 6
- America Enters the World : A People's History of the Progressive Era and World War I, V. 7
- Redeeming the Time : A People's History of the 1920s and the New Deal, V. 8
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by J.K. Rowling
The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould
The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris

Many of these books I aready have and, since I'm currently sans work, among the few that I don't have the new Harry Potter is the only book on the list that I'll be buying new.

I'm almost fininshed with The Bible Unearthed and I'm about half-way done with volume one of A New Age Now Begins, but I decided to cheat and include them on the list anyway.

And here's a list of books that've been recommended to me but, being broke, I cannot currently afford:

Creating Born Criminals by Nicole Hahn Rafter, which was recommended by Mnemosyne
Wild Minds by Marc Hauser
Demonic Males by Richard Wrangham

If you have any recommendations to add to my "when I have money" list, feel free to let me know.

***

As I've been reading A New Age, the thought occurred to me that most of our country's founding fathers were dyed in the wool geeks. Here's an example. To set the stage, future President John Adams and most of the other members of the Massachusetts delegation to what would later become known as the First Continental Congress are travelling to Philadelphia, stopping in various cities and towns along the way, in this case New York:

New York turned out to be a round of elegant dinners, of meetings and discussions with patriots of all ranks and persuasions. "The Way we have been in," Adams observed ruefully, "of breakfasting, dining, drinking Coffee, etc. about the City is very disagreable on some Accounts...it hinders us from seein the Colledge, the Churches, the Printers Offices and Booksellers Shops, and many other Things which we should choose to see."
A New Age Now Begins, Vol. 1 p. 421-2

So he goes to New York, talks to pretty much everybody who is anybody among the patriot circle, is the guest of honor at numerous parties, and what's his reaction? He complains because he didn't have time to stop by the bookstore. This is a man after my own heart.

Should I stay or should I go now?

2005-06-13T13:30:00.000-05:00

Okay, so this is my new blog. I have many interests, from music to history to science to movies and on and on. One of my interests though is politics and I think it would be wrong not to address the single most important political issue of the day in my inaugural post.

I can't say that my basic thinking about the U.S. being in Iraq has changed significantly, however in the past several years the reality on the ground has quite obviously changed and that should be reflected in my current thoughts as what we should do.

I initially opposed going into Iraq, primarily because I believed (and still believe) that doing so would make us less safe. Our primary goal should have been reducing terrorism. Before we went in, I argued that an invasion would end up increasing the number and stridency of terrorists with a hatred of the U.S. As the Soviet's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, and specificly the CIA trained and armed mujahadeen fighters, led to the current leadership of al-Qaida; so I maintained that invading Iraq would be organized terrorism's greatest recruitment and training tool. In addition, invading Iraq would (did) draw off forces that were needed to locate and eliminate al-Qaida.

Once we were there however, my belief was that we needed to say and finish the job leaving the Iraqis with a viable state - sometimes known as Colin Powell's Pottery Barn rule, "you break it, you bought it."

Over the past nine months or so though, I have become increasingly more convinced that, with the current force structure and within any sort of reasonable time frame, it is not possible to secure the country much less help them develop a viable, unified government.

The Bush administration has already stated an unwillingness, if indeed it even has the capability, to increase the number of forces in the region to a number that would be necessary to effect a rapid stabilization (something on the order of 1,000,000 military persons in the region). In addition, it is looking highly doubtful that the military has the resources to act decisively if there were a major flare-up somewhere around the world - a fact which has not gone unnoticed by either Iran or North Korea.

Without such numbers estimates on the time necessary to complete the mission in Iraq vary from 5-25 years, in other words god only knows. The most recent poll numbers show that support for the war is around 40% and there's no reason to assume that a protracted deployment will do anything but shrink these numbers. As well, the military is facing massive problems in recruiting new soldiers and Marines, while the administration has ruled out a return to the draft; and given that the current manpower crisis is directly related to the war in Iraq, the longer the unpopular war continues the more serious the personnel shortage will become.

If we don't have the resources to solve the problem in the short term, and we don't have the resources in either manpower or popularity, to stick it out long term; the question becomes, "when and under what circumstances should we withdraw?" There are no easy answers to this question. If we leave prior to completing the mission, it is highly likely that Iraq will devolve into civil war and fracture into three separate states upsetting the balance in the region that was in place prior to the invasion.

I'm willing to listen to any ideas that are presented about the best way to extricate ourselves from a bad situation, but if my calculus about our ability to succeed is correct, staying the course is not helping and is only costing the lives and health of our military personnel.