« August 6, 2006 - August 12, 2006 | Main | August 20, 2006 - August 26, 2006 »

August 19, 2006

Turn Left or Triangulate?

Matt Bai's analysis of what the Lieberman/Lamont situation really means is being bandied about around our virtual offices:

In the aftermath of the primary, Democrats settled on the idea that Lieberman fell because of his support for the Iraq war. This was technically true, in the same way that a 95-year-old man might technically be said to die from pneumonia; there were, to say the least, underlying causes. The war was a galvanizing issue, but Lieberman's loss was just the first major victory for a larger grass-roots movement. While that movement is identified with young, online activists, it is populated largely by exasperated and ideologically disappointed baby boomers. These are the liberals who quietly seethed as Bill Clinton worked with Republicans to reform welfare and pass free-trade agreements. After the ''stolen'' election of 2000 and the subsequent loss of House and Senate seats in 2004, these Democrats felt duped. If triangulation wasn't a winning strategy, they asked, why were they ever asked to tolerate it in the first place? The Web gave them a place to share their frustrations, and Howard Dean gave them an icon.

Iraq has energized these older lapsed liberals; for a generation that got into politics marching against Vietnam, an antiwar movement is comfortable space. But it was the yearning for a more confrontational brand of opposition on all fronts, for something resembling the black-and-white moral choices of the 1960's, that more broadly animated Lamont's insurgency. Connecticut's primary showdown (which now appears to be headed for a sequel in November) marked an emphatic repudiation not just of the war but also of Clinton's ''third way'' governing philosophy - a philosophy not unlike the Republican ethos of ''compromise'' and ''pragmatism'' that so infuriated Reagan conservatives.

The whole tamale after the jump.

The New York Times
August 11, 2006
What Are the Lieberman Foes For?
By MATT BAI

A few days before Joe Lieberman, who was very nearly vice president of the United States, was effectively vanquished from his party by Ned Lamont, an affable cable executive who once played a minor role in governing the town of Greenwich, Conn., I happened to talk with Jeffrey Bell. A political consultant who is as cordial a man as you will find in Washington, Bell isn't as famous as some of his fellow Republicans, but he owns a storied place in the history of the conservative movement. A young aide to Ronald Reagan during his 1976 insurgency, Bell went on to challenge a sitting Republican senator, Clifford Case of New Jersey, in 1978. He stunned the political world by winning that race. And though he lost handily to the basketball legend Bill Bradley in the general election, just two years later Reagan ascended to the White House. If anyone was in a position, then, to assess the significance of the Connecticut rebellion, it was Bell, whose small but noteworthy victory over his party's confused establishment presaged a historic political realignment. ''It's tempting for us to underrate Dailykos and Moveon.org,'' Bell told me, referring to the Web pioneers who launched Lamont's improbable campaign. ''It's easy for us to say these guys are nuts. But the truth is, they're on the rise, and I think they're very impressive.''

There are, in fact, some compelling parallels between this moment in Democratic politics and the one that saw the ideological cleansing of the Republican ranks three decades ago. In ''Reagan's Revolution,'' an inside account of Reagan's failed 1976 campaign, Craig Shirley notes that aides to President Gerald Ford warned that they were ''in real danger of being outorganized by a small number of highly motivated right-wing nuts.'' Those so-called nuts, meanwhile, waged war on the then widely held belief that ''if they were to succeed, Republicans had to be 'pragmatic,' they had to 'broaden the base' and they had to 'compromise.' Otherwise, they would always be in the minority.'' The very same things might be written now, substituting the words ''left'' and ''Democratic'' for ''right'' and ''Republican.'' And like those bygone Republican leaders, establishment Democrats exhibit a surprisingly shallow understanding of the uprising that now threatens to engulf them.

In the aftermath of the primary, Democrats settled on the idea that Lieberman fell because of his support for the Iraq war. This was technically true, in the same way that a 95-year-old man might technically be said to die from pneumonia; there were, to say the least, underlying causes. The war was a galvanizing issue, but Lieberman's loss was just the first major victory for a larger grass-roots movement. While that movement is identified with young, online activists, it is populated largely by exasperated and ideologically disappointed baby boomers. These are the liberals who quietly seethed as Bill Clinton worked with Republicans to reform welfare and pass free-trade agreements. After the ''stolen'' election of 2000 and the subsequent loss of House and Senate seats in 2004, these Democrats felt duped. If triangulation wasn't a winning strategy, they asked, why were they ever asked to tolerate it in the first place? The Web gave them a place to share their frustrations, and Howard Dean gave them an icon.

Iraq has energized these older lapsed liberals; for a generation that got into politics marching against Vietnam, an antiwar movement is comfortable space. But it was the yearning for a more confrontational brand of opposition on all fronts, for something resembling the black-and-white moral choices of the 1960's, that more broadly animated Lamont's insurgency. Connecticut's primary showdown (which now appears to be headed for a sequel in November) marked an emphatic repudiation not just of the war but also of Clinton's ''third way'' governing philosophy - a philosophy not unlike the Republican ethos of ''compromise'' and ''pragmatism'' that so infuriated Reagan conservatives.

If history were to repeat itself, this outpouring of new liberal passion would portend trouble for the party's establishment candidates in 2008 (especially one possible candidate whose last name happens to be Clinton). But there is at least one crucial difference between insurgents of the 1970's and today. When Bell ran for the Senate in 1978, he was so obsessed with his plan to slash taxes that he went to the extraordinary length of bringing in Arthur Laffer, the renowned conservative economist, to draw his famous Laffer Curve at a news conference in Trenton. By contrast, Lamont's signature proposal as a primary candidate - and the only one anyone cared to hear, really - seemed to be the hard-to-dispute notion that he is not, in fact, Joe Lieberman. He offered platitudes about universal health care and good jobs and about bringing the troops home but nothing that might define him as anything other than what he is: an acceptable alternative.

Leaders of the Netroots, as the Internet activists have been named, will tell you that big ideas are way overrated in American politics - that you first have to master the business of getting elected before you can worry about how to govern. (Most powerful Democrats in Washington now believe this too.) But even with legions of outraged conservatives at his back, Reagan would not have taken over his party in 1980 - let alone the White House - had he not articulated an affirmative and bold argument against his party's status quo, vowing to devolve the federal government and roll back détente with the Soviets. Passion and fury started the revolution, but it took a leader with larger vision to finish the job.

Matt Bai, a contributing writer who covers national politics for the magazine, is working on a book about Democratic Party politics.

August 18, 2006

Axis of Evil Takes to the Blogosphere

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is now blogging on his personal website, where you can take part in a poll on whether the US is trying to start a world war. (Click on the flag in the upper-right corner for the English version.) His first-- and only-- entry last week was a 2,000-word autobiography, so it's probably a bit premature to call it a blog. Right-wing bloggers in the U.S. are worried that the site is just a way to install viruses on U.S. and Israeli computers.

Though Ahmadinejad's site traffic is reportedly good, to date he’s only received one comment: A request for bigger font sizes.

UN Ambassador turned Wal-Mart PR flak stumbles with diplomacy

Andrew Young, ex-mayor of Atlanta and former United Nations Ambassador, resigned last night from his post at Wal-Mart. Brought in 6 months ago to improve the retail giant’s image, this civil rights icon has lost his way. In response to the superstore’s displacement of mom-and-pop shops in Atlanta, Young told the Los Angeles Sentinel:

Those are the people who have been overcharging us…I think they’ve ripped off our communities enough. First it was Jews, then it was Koreans and now it’s Arabs.

Certainly a blow to Wal-Mart’s image and its already dwindling profits, down 26% in the second fiscal quarter, Young’s commentary could bode well for the Democrats' new campaign against the company. Some have reservations—do the Democrats really want to paint themselves as anti-business? But Senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) put it this way:

It’s not anti-business…Wal-Mart has become emblematic of the anxiety around the country, and the middle-class squeeze.

We can now add ethnic slandering to that happy-faced emblem.

Who'd You Rather Read, Gary Webb or Judy Miller?

On occasion of the tenth anniversary of "Dark Alliance," the San Jose Mercury News series on CIA-contra-crack connections that set off more major-newspaper handwringing than perhaps anything this side of the Bush-Iraq-WMD fiasco, Nick Schou of the alternative OC Weekly has an op-ed in the LA Times that's worth reading. Doesn't matter whether you're still puzzling over why exactly every major paper in the country saw fit to "debunk" claims Webb had not actually made, or whether you've never heard of the guy; the point is that Webb (whose reporting, as Eric Umansky noted in this space, was in significant regards confirmed by the government itself) was guilty of hyperbole, but not of credulity or subservience. He had the facts, and he made more of them than he should have. But as Schou points out:

Contrary to the wholly discredited reporting on Iraq's nonexistent weapons of mass destruction by New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Webb was the only victim of his mistakes. Nobody else died because of his work, and no one, either at the CIA or the Mercury News, is known to have lost so much as a paycheck.

Webb shot himself in late 2004, his career and personal life having come unraveled in the wake of "Dark Alliance." We could use the likes of him right now.

August 17, 2006

Teenage Embed Helps Convict CIA Contractor in Beating Death of Afghan Detainee

Dave Passaro was found guilty today of beating Afghan detainee Abdul Wali to death, based in large part on the testimony of Hyder Akbar. Hyder is the young Afghan American whose memoir Come Back to Afghanistan recounts the first few years of the Karzai administration—in which Hyder's dad served as spokesperson and then governor of the Kunar province. Pitching in as translator to U.S. troops, Hyder accompanied Wali to a U.S. Army base to undergo questioning. Hyder assured the terrified Ali the Americans would treat him fairly. Three days later, Akbar returned to collect Wali's corpse.

You can read some background of Hyder's testimony here. Hyder's amazing series of "This American Life" episodes (produced by Susan Burton) can be found here. And you can read my interview with Hyder, in which he talks about the Wali episode, here.

Sign of the Apocalypse (Or: Kerry’s Running Again)

Always ahead of the pack, John Kerry is trying to regain some political traction by sending out letters attacking Joe Lieberman.

So he's running. Need more evidence? Follow the money.

Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) is willing to use nearly $14 million left over from his 2004 presidential bid to narrow the fundraising lead of his chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.).His 2004 nest egg has given Kerry the luxury of focusing his efforts on raising money for Democratic candidates rather than worrying about money for his own 2008 Senate reelection race or about courting donors for another presidential run....

But using 2004 funds in a Democratic primary is certain to spark criticism from Democrats still angry that Kerry didn’t spend all of his available resources to defeat Bush.

“The money is available. It’s a loaded gun, whether he runs for president or Senate reelection,” a Kerry aide said. “But Kerry’s focus in 2006 is delivering for the party and getting Democrats elected, as evidenced by his aggressive fundraising for critical House and Senate seats and local races across the country.”

Kerry’s aides are highlighting the funds to dull the glitter of Monday’s news that Clinton has raised $44 million for her reelection race against weak Republican competition and has $22 million in her Senate campaign’s bank account.

Make it stop.

“There are No Hereditary Kings in America”

The legal logic in U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor’s opinion that the NSA wiretapping program is unconstitutional may be weak, as some con-law scholars are claiming, but you gotta admire her flair for rhetoric:

"It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights…. There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."

And even if her argument were airtight, would the GOP spin be any different?

Congressional Republicans quickly condemned Taylor's ruling, and the Republican National Committee issued a news release titled, "Liberal Judge Backs Dem Agenda To Weaken National Security."

U.S. only country to ban funding for clean syringe programs

"Give Them Dirty Needles and Let Them Die" is the title of a new piece in AlterNet, inspired by a remark once made by Judge Judy when she went to Australia and was asked her opinion about the distribution of sterile needles to drug injectors to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis C.

In her report, author Roseanne Scotti maintains that the judge's remark is actually a reflection of the federal government's attitude toward the clean needle program. Opponents of syringe access programs, Scotti points out, say that providing such programs "condones" drug use. The fact that several studies have shown that needle programs do not actually encourage drug use are probably irrelevant to the opposition, who not only turn their noses up at scientific research, but who also oppose anything that they can claim condones a behavior they do not like.

This is not to argue that anyone likes the idea of drug addiction, but drug addiction is a reality. One cannot help but wonder whether Judge Judy and her followers likewise condemn Rush Limbaugh to a painful death, or whether they wish former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist had died of AIDS.

According to the AlterNet piece, the rate of HIV related to shared syringes is 4% in Australia, 6% in the UK, 17% in Canada, and 22% in the U.S. Even Iran has started a syringe exchange program. In 2002, U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher concluded in his report to Congress:

After reviewing all of the research to date, the senior scientists of the Department and I have unanimously agreed that there is conclusive scientific evidence that syringe exchange programs . . . are an effective public health intervention that reduces the transmission of HIV and does not encourage the use of illegal drugs.

Satcher's conclusion was corroborated by the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Institutes of Health Concensus Panel, and the AIDS Advisory Commissions of Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. However, the U.S. remains the only country with a ban against the federal funding of clean syringe programs.

Depends on what the meaning of "hoax" is

Following in Al Gore's footsteps, earlier this month former President Bill Clinton launched an effort with 22 of the world's largest cities to cut emissions, a bigger move on the global warming front than anything our current administration has offered. Others, though, are taking up the reins including:

California Governor Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger is in talks with Prime Minister Tony Blair about trading carbon dioxide pollution credits.

22 states and the District of Columbia have set standards demanding that utilities as much as 33 percent from renewable sources by 2020.

11 states have set goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

California has passed legislation mandating that automakers reduce their vehicles' carbon dioxide emissions 30 percent by 2016 (10 other states have committed to adopt the same standards if the law survives in court).

As many as 13 states are working to get power plants to trade pollution credits for carbon emissions while cutting greenhouse gas emissions 10 percent by 2019.

Meanwhile, Congress can't get it together to pass the Climate Stewardship Act which has been around since 2003. That one of the bill's pioneering authors, Joe Lieberman, just lost his primary, is a less than promising sign.

Global Warming a Hoax? Don't Buy it!

In case you doubted it, there are still those arguing that global warming is a figment of Al Gore's fevered imagination. Our local Contra Costa Times, for instance, ran an opinion piece the other day that began:

[Challenge] global warming hysteria next time you're at a cocktail party and see what happens.

Admittedly, I possess virtually no expertise in science. That puts me in exactly the same position as most dogmatic environmentalists who want to craft public policy around global warming fears.

The only inconvenient truth about global warming, contends Colorado State University's Bill Gray, is that a genuine debate has never actually taken place. Hundreds of scientists, many of them prominent in the field, agree.

Gray is perhaps the world's foremost hurricane expert. His Tropical Storm Forecast sets the standard. Yet, his criticism of the global warming "hoax" makes him an outcast.

"They've been brainwashing us for 20 years," Gray says. "Starting with the nuclear winter and now with the global warming. This scare will also run its course. In 15-20 years, we'll look back and see what a hoax this was."

Yes, well, the reason the guy's an outcast--if you take "outcast" to mean "disagreed with because holding views at odds with the overwhelming scientific consensus"--is that the vast majority of scientists disagree with him, on scientific grounds.

Anyway, more on the "hottest hoax around" from Mark Fiore. (Click on the cartoon to watch.)

Monsoons, flooding and landslides, oh my! El Paso's finally an official Disaster Area

President Bush finally declared El Paso County a disaster area, more than two weeks after major flooding hit his home state. The border city was hit with 15 inches of rain in the span of a week (including seven inches in one day), nearly twice the annual precipitation. Including in neighboring Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, more than 5,000 homes have been damaged and preliminary estimates put the damage at more than $100 million.

Flash flood warnings are still in effect and the Army Corps of Engineers has said that an aging earthen dam holding back 6 million gallons of water from the Mexican side of the Rio Grande, could flood El Paso in as little as three minutes. Mayor John Cook told the El Paso Times, it would be "like a tidal wave hitting downtown El Paso."

Two years ago John Walton, a hydrologist at UTEP, tried to get the city, the Army Corps of Engineers and FEMA to do something about the rapid development in arroyos and the resulting poor drainage systems in the city, telling top officials, "failure to address these issues could lead to flooding of homes and businesses during a large storm event." His pleas were ignored.

Federal Court Strikes Down NSA Wiretap Program

A federal judge in Detroit has ordered the Bush administration to halt the NSA wiretap program, saying it violates free speech rights, protections against unreasonable searches and the constitutional check on the power of the presidency.

From the opinion:

This is a challenge to the legality of a secret program (hereinafter “TSP”) undisputedly inaugurated by the National Security Agency (hereinafter “NSA”) at least by 2002 and continuing today, which intercepts without benefit of warrant or other judicial approval, prior or subsequent, the international telephone and internet communications of numerous persons and organizations within this country. The TSP has been acknowledged by this Administration to have been authorized by the President’s secret order during 2002 and reauthorized at least thirty times since. ...

"[T]his court is constrained to grant to Plaintiffs the Partial Summary Judgment requested, and holds that the TSP violates the APA; the Separation of Powers doctrine; the First and Fourth Amendments of the United States Constitution; and the statutory law."

Yale's Jack Balkin isn't impressed by the court's reasoning, though.

It is quite clear that the government will appeal this opinion, and because the court's opinion, quite frankly, has so many holes in it, it is also clear to me that the plaintiffs will have to relitigate the entire matter before the circuit court, and possibly the Supreme Court. The reasons that the court below has given are just not good enough. This is just the opening shot in what promises to be a long battle.

Bush's Summer Reading: The Stranger (?!)

Why would Albert Camus's classic novel strike a nerve, John Stewart wonders. (Click on the image.)

August 16, 2006

West Virginia school fights to keep painting of Jesus on the wall

Some kids raise money to buy sports equipment for their school. Some raise money to help Katrina victims. At Bridgeport High School in Clarksburg, West Virginia, the kids raised $6,700 so that a picture of Jesus can remain on the wall. They had some help from the local Christian Freedom Fund, which raised over $150,000 to pay for legal fees.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Harrison County Board of Education two months ago because the presence of a painting, "Head of Christ," which hangs outside the principal's office, sends a message that the school board endorses Christianity as an official religion. The sepia-toned painting has been there for thirty-seven years.

Eigfht national legal groups with constitutional law expertise have volunteered to help the school board, and "You Can't Take Our Jesus Down" T-shirts were spotted at a recent public meeting of the school board. The plot took a new twist a few days ago, however, when school board member Mike Queen was asked by the West Virginia Ethics Commission to stop soliciting money for the Christian Freedom fund. Queen maintains that he contacted the board, and not the other way around, when he learned that others were interested in asking the board for an opinion on his fund-raising efforts.

Even Developed Countries are Running Low on Water

Next week is World Water Week, with a big conference going on in Stockholm, Sweden. To mark the occasion WWF has put out a new and depressing report warning that climate change and poor resource management have combined to produce water shortages even in developed countries. need to reduce pollution, get serious about conservation, and fix up ageing infrastructure.

In Europe, countries on the Atlantic are suffering recurring droughts, while water-intensive tourism and irrigated agriculture are endangering water resources in the Mediterranean. In Australia, the world’s driest continent, salinity is a major threat to a large proportion of its key agricultural areas.

Despite high rainfall in Japan, contamination of water supplies is an extremely serious issue in many areas. In the United States, large areas are already using substantially more water than can be naturally replenished. This situation will only be exacerbated as global warming brings lower rainfall, increased evaporation and changed snowmelt patterns.

Some of the world’s thirstiest cities, such as Houston and Sydney, are using more water than can be replenished. In London, leakage and loss is estimated at 300 Olympic-size swimming pools daily due to ageing water mains. It is however notable that cities with less severe water issues such as New York tend to have a longer tradition of conserving catchment areas and expansive green areas within their boundaries.

More on water: Not so long ago John Luoma wrote in Mother Jones about the true cost of water privatization in cities all over the world, as measured in contamination, rate increases, shortages, and scandals. And Maude Barlow described in an interview how developing countries are increasingly pressured into ceding control over their dwindling water supplies to private firms.

Private donors give $100 million to stem cell research

Nearly three years ago California voters approved a $3 billion bond for embryonic stem cell research. Yet state dollars are tied up in lawsuits bolstered by the religious right (more on the lawsuits and other states' efforts to fund research on new stem cell lines here).

Today the Wall Street Journal reports that private donors have contributed more than $100 million to the state's new stem-cell research agency, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, as well as to research programs at state universities.

Donors include Ray Dolby, of Dolby Laboratories Inc., who has given $21 million and Eli Broad, real estate magnate and philanthropist, who has given at least $27 million. Venture capitalist John Doerr, bond-fund manager Bill Gross, and Qualcomm Inc. founder Irwin Jacobs have also been major contributors.

Mother Jones Names New Editors-in-Chief

We're happy to announce today that Monika Bauerlein and Clara Jeffery have been named the editors-in-chief of Mother Jones. Monika, who was most recently investigative editor, has been at the magazine since 2000. Clara has been deputy editor since 2002. In one fell swoop, they've bumped up the total of women editors in chief of "thought leader" magazines by half.

They'll be discussing their new gig and their plans for the magazine and web site on Mother Jones Radio this Sunday. If you have questions or comments you'd like to hear them address on the air, please email host Angie Coiro at angie@motherjones.com.

(Official press release here.)

Transatlantic Flight in Emergency Diversion

"This isn't just an 'I want another drink' kind of thing, it was a disruption that caused them to divert the plane," said FBI spokesperson Nenette Day.

TSA officials denied reports on Fox News that a female passenger had brandished a screwdriver, Vaseline and matches and had a note referring to al-Qaida in her possession. (Guardian)

As one who'll be taking a transatlantic flight to London this weekend, let me just say: oh boy.

Oliver Stone, 9/11, and the Big Lie

Ruth Rosen, writing at Tomdispatch, considers Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center," finding it vivid, subtle, graphic, emotionally compelling--but ultimately disfigured by one massive failing: that of reinforcing the Big Lie--that 9/11 was somehow linked to Iraq or supported by Saddam Hussein.

You might say, "But everyone knows it was al-Qaeda." And you'd be right, but do most Americans really know just who those terrorists were or that they had no connection to Iraq -- that not a single one of them even came from that country? It doesn't sound very important until you realize that various polls over the last five years have reported from 20% to 50% of Americans still believe Iraqis were on those planes. (They were not.) As of early 2005, according to a Harris poll, 47% of Americans were convinced that Saddam Hussein actually helped plan the attack and supported the hijackers. And in February, 2006, according to a unique Zogby poll of American troops serving in Iraq, "85% said the U.S. mission is mainly ‘to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks'; 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was ‘to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.'" ...

How could Oliver Stone leave it up to viewers to discover for themselves who committed this crime? And how could he leave the audience with the impression that there was a connection, as Dick Cheney has never stopped saying, between 9/11 and Iraq?

Read it here.

Lieberman “Energized,” Clinton Triangulating…

So Patrick Healy and Nick Confessore report in the New York Times that Joe Lieberman is “energized” and “emboldened” and that, already, there’s a “full-throated” re-enactment of the “blistering” primary taking place.

We’ll leave the jokes to Wonkette, but the spiciest part of this piece comes a few paragaraphs down:

The senator appears so emboldened that in spite of the Democratic unity around Mr. Lamont, some Washington Democrats are now acknowledging that a Lieberman victory in November is a distinct possibility. According to guests at a fund-raiser for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Hamptons on Saturday, Mrs. Clinton — who is supporting Mr. Lamont — said that Mr. Lieberman had more than a 50-50 chance of winning re-election. (Clinton aides said they could not confirm or deny the remark; one of the aides said that if Mrs. Clinton had discussed the race, she might have been referring to a new poll that had Mr. Lieberman slightly ahead.)

It depends on what the definition of “chance” is?

The way you know the 2008 race has begun in earnest is how the Clintons have ramped up the triangulation. (And with both of them triangulating, it’s more like hexagonation.) I don’t get as white hot angry on this subject as many on the left; to my mind there’s a certain tactical dexterity you just have to admire. That dexterity was the real core of the Clinton/Morris doctrine; running to the middle was only a method to reach a goal. (On this point, I disagree somewhat with MoveOn’s Eli Pariser). The real goal was to give Bill as much maneuvering room as possible.

So now it is Hillary who needs the room to maneuver, and never more than now, when she’s trapped between the “always anti-war” left and the (far more electorally important) “fairly recently disenchanted.” Her gender makes her, more than any male candidate, vulnerable if the Republicans’ “cut-and-run Defeatocrats” line gains traction. (I don’t like that this is so, but it is the truth.)

Enter Bill. By pivoting around her, he can fake a play in one direction, while she moves to the other, or throw her a pass downfield. Ignoring the Dubai ports debacle, which was failed triangulation (or was it?), the Clinton’s have been running these plays beautifully. There’s been all the mixed messages over Lieberman and Lamont, of course, but let’s also not forget that at the height of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”/“candidate again?” hoopla, the Clinton Foundation launched an anti-global warming initiative. Which is great, but also conveniently timed.

Also in the NYT piece, this little tidbit.

Yet Mr. Lamont’s staffing needs are also one of several signs that his rookie bid for statewide election is still evolving: He lacks such basic political tools as an opposition research effort to ferret out the sources of Mr. Lieberman’s campaign contributions and other tidbits that might embarrass the senator. Mr. Lamont’s communications and advance operations also need to be expanded, said Tom Swan, the campaign manager.

“There is a need for us to adjust a lot, to adjust significant pieces of the campaign and tap our thousands of volunteers,” Mr. Swan said. “Having said that, I believe we have a lot to build off of to make that easier.”

Code for bloggers=oppo research?

August 15, 2006

The impact of war on wildlife, pets and the environment

An oil spill in Lebanon is being called a "major catastrophe" by the Lebanese government. The spill was created when Israeli jets hit storage tanks at the Jyiieh power station, and it now covers fifty miles of coast. It is estimated that the amount of oil that has entered the water is almost the amount that entered during the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident. Environment Minister Yacoub al-Sarraf said "We have never seen a spill like this in the history of Lebanon. It is a major catastrophe." The cost of the clean-up is estimated to be between $40 and $50 million.

The green sea turtle, which is endangered, nests on the coast of Lebanon. Some of the oil has settled on the sea floor, where tuna spawn.

There is also a problem with forest fires. According to Mounir Abou Ghanem, director general of the Association for Forest Development and Conservation in Beirut, there is no one to deal with the fires in Lebanon because the priority is relief and humanitarian work.

In the meantime, the animals in both Lebanon and Israel are suffering and dying. Rescue groups in Lebanon are doing their best to rescue stranded pets and feed any wandering animals. One shelter was hit by shrapnel and another was very close to a site that was bombed, so the rescuers are in danger, as well as the animals. Evacuees are seeing and running over dead animals on the roads as they flee.

In northern Israel, where people must abandon their homes, there are daily requests for shelter for pets. A rescue group, Let the Animals Live, is finding foster homes, feeding abandoned animals, and in a move reminiscent of Katrina, trying to get into houses to rescue abandoned pets. Rescuers in Israel are also tending to pets that have been injured by rockets.

And also reminiscent of Katrina, Americans and Canadians evacuated from Lebanon are not allowed to take their pets with them.

Music Slowly Revives in New Orleans

The London Observer has a great audio slide show on music in New Orleans, post-Katrina. (To check it out, click on the photo, which shows the remains of a jukebox after the flood.) You get the basic gist from this paragraph in an accompanying article.

Following the storm it would be hard to say that music is in rude health, even in its rawest form, but look hard enough and the spirit of what everyone here calls 'the real New Orleans' is still intact. 'I defy you to spend a day in this city without hearing live music,' says Ben Jaffe, whose parents founded the French Quarter jazz venue Preservation Hall in 1961. He now plays bass with the Preservation Hall Jazz Band. 'You can't walk down the street without hearing live music.' He's right. Even with 50 per cent of the population absent, much of the city a ghost town where even the 24-hour diners close at lunchtime because they've run out of food or staff and neighbourhoods are mouldering and decaying, music is everywhere, be it hip hop, bounce, brass bands or traditional jazz.

Sean Hannity...Bombs?

From ThinkProgress:

Yesterday on Fox News, Sean Hannity bashed Americans for Peace Now founder Mark Rosenblum for claiming that Hannity had suggested Israel should drop a nuclear bomb to destroy Hezbollah. “I never said drop a nuclear bomb,” Hannity responded. A few moments later, Hannity slipped and said, “It could have. They could obliterate them.” Hannity ended the segment by telling Rosenblum he was “full of sh*t.”

10,000 Bags Missing in British Airports

BBC reports that around 10,000 bags checked in by British Airways passengers have gone missing at airports since the UK security alert began. BA says half of them are still piled up at airports waiting to be delivered back to their owners.

So, everything's back to normal, then. That was fast.