MotherJones.com | MoJoBlog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: November 26, 2006

« November 19, 2006 - November 25, 2006 | Main | December 3, 2006 - December 9, 2006 »

December 1, 2006

Are Americans Disengaging or Just Finding Others Ways to Engage?

Our Washington Bureau points out that American voices of dissent appear to be waning, which sadly to say was quite evident at a San Francisco anti-war rally I covered back in October for the Center for American Progress' Campusprogress.org. There was a sad showing of maybe 1000 people which paled in comparison to the large swarms of people that took to the streets here in SF leading up to the U.S. invasion in March of 2003. There were many grumblings as to why the turn out was so low: many thought ANSWER, the anti-war group who organizes rallies, has alienated large groups of Americans due to their anti-Israel position (in fact UFPJ, another anti-war group who organizes protests now officially refuses to organize with them on a national level); some felt that people would wait to cast their vote against Iraq (which it does appear they did to some extent); and some were angered by thoughts that perhaps the American people are just plain disengaged. Although the decrease in participation at protests does send a strong message, maybe Americans have found other outlets- like blogging and voting (there was a nearly 5% increase from 2002 in people under 30 who voted this year). And although Iraq was not the only issue Americans had on their minds when they headed to the ballots this year, it was a seminal one. Only time will tell if engaged Americans once again will take to the streets en masse, as sectarian violence in Iraq increases even more and decisions by the administration as to how to proceed in Iraq are made.

Mayhem in Mexico

Today's transition from outgoing Mexican president Vicente Fox to his hand-picked and rather bureaucratic successor Felipe Calderón gave the lie to the comforting notion that Mexico has a healthy democracy. Calderón had to bust his way into the congressional chamber to be sworn in.

Calderón's leftist opponent, former Mexico City mayor Manuel López Obrador, has refused to accept the results of the July election. López Obrador's supporters had tried to block the entrances to the chamber. When Calderón managed to enter, flanked by body guards, they booed, whistled, shot birds and fought their way through the swearing-in ceremony (see the Washington Post slideshow).

López Obrador held a strong lead in the months before the election, which seemed to come crashing down in the final weeks of campaigning among accusations that he was a megalomaniac who loves to stir up dissent.

So, is he proving his opponents right, or did they set him up before they stole the elections—by a conveniently narrow margin of 240,000 votes among 41 million ballots cast? Hard to say. Mexico hardly has a solid record of legitimate elections—the PRI party lied, cheated and stole its way to the presidency (and pretty much everything else) in Mexico for more than 70 years. Electoral confidence was higher in the 2000 election of Vicente Fox, the first non-PRI candidate to occupy the presidential palace since that party was formed in the crucible of the 1910-1919 Mexican Revolution.

Those who follow Mexican politics will know it doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to suggest that perhaps the PRI made a back-room agreement to pass the torch to Fox's conservative PAN party precisely to prevent the populist leftism López Obrador represents from taking hold in a country whose rich/poor gap makes the U.S. look like Norway.

Trouble Brewing in Lebanon

After a show of force in this summer's conflict with Israel, the Shiite militia Hezbollah is now trying to drive the Western-backed Lebanese government from power. Nearly a quarter of Lebanon's population took to the streets of Beirut earlier today, while the beleaguered prime minister, Fouad Siniora, took shelter behind hundreds of troops and police.

Lebanon has been a mess for a long time. A 15-year civil war with more factions than you can count ended in 1991, leaving the Lebanese government a virtual puppet of Syria. Syria lost its power in the wake of huge protests following the revelation that Syria was involved in the February 2005 assassination of then-prime minister Rafik Hariri. Siniora took office immediately thereafter.

Trouble began brewing for Siniora's government when Hezbollah single-handedly held its own against the Israeli Defense Forces this summer, earning massive popular support. With the assassination of a Christian anti-Syrian politician in late November, the situation in Lebanon started to look eerily like the one that immediately preceded Lebanon's civil war.

The bloodbath in Iraq isn't helping ease tensions between Lebanon's Sunni Muslims, who generally support Siniora's anti-Syrian government, and Shiites, who oppose it.

So perhaps Iraq is a role model after all—not for democracy, but for civil war.

AIDS Can't be Fought with Sunshine and Puppies

According to a story in today's Boston Globe , a number of faith-based organizations used this year's World AIDS Day to lash out at the Global Fund to Fight AIDS (a $6.6 billion organization that supports programs in 136 countries).

Peter L. Brandt, a senior director at Focus on the Family, thinks Congress should cut all spending on the Global Fund's HIV programs, saying that the Fund concentrates too heavily on condoms and discriminates against organizations like his.

They should instead focus on spreading the abstinence message? A lot of good that's done here.

In the Global South, where HIV is spreading fastest, abstinence and marriage are not adequate protection against the deadly virus. To the contrary, it is often the primary site of infection, especially for women. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof writes, "the stark reality is that what kills young women [in Africa] is often not promiscuity, but marriage. Indeed, just about the deadliest thing a women in southern Africa can do is get married."

Crosscheck that with the following:

-In South Africa, studies suggest that “marital partnerships are mainly responsible for adolescent female [HIV] infection.” Studies in Kenya and Zambia show that adolescent girls have an increased risk of HIV infection when they marry significantly older men. (International Center for Research on Women and Population Service)

-In a study of Zambian women, fewer than 25% of the participants believed that a married woman could refuse to have sex with her husband, even if she knew he had been unfaithful or was HIV-positive. Only 11% of participants believed that a woman could ask her husband to use a condom in these circumstances. (United Nation's Fund for Women).

-On Colombia’s Atlantic Coast, about half of HIV-positive women are “housewives with a stable partner.” (World Health Organization)

Latex anyone?

—Koshlan Mayer-Blackwell

Want to Know Your Terror Score? Too Bad, Says TSA

Are you a vegetarian who prefers to sit near the front of the plane? If so, prepare to be harassed. CNN recently uncovered that the Homeland Security Department’s Automated Targeting System [ATS] assigns a terrorist rating number to every single person entering or leaving the United States. The score is based on the passenger’s method of payment, one-way flights, meal preferences, seat assignment, e-mail address, voluntary and involuntary upgrade history, and frequent flier miles. But unlike a credit score, it cannot be challenged or even viewed by the individual. And the score will stay on file for 40 years.

This might not be such a huge problem if passengers’ ATS numbers weren’t going to be made available to state agencies, students, and private contractors, among others. Theoretically, if a person is, say, denied a job at a post office or a construction company because of their terror score, they’ll never know and they’ll never be able to challenge it.

Given that many infants have been harassed at airports because they have similar names to terrorists, the chance that the ATS scores and information will be misused seems high. And, with the ATS’s new headquarters and a staff that’s tripled since 2001, it seems we can expect even more searches and baseless groundings.

—Jen Phillips

Get the Goat This Year

This season, the globally aware and trend conscious want to get the goat under their Christmas tree. Charitable organizations have started selling the four-legged critters and other “virtual gifts” in order to address demands for ethical gifts and increase fundraising.

Oxfam is one such organization and has launched a website to sell charitable gifts such as medicines for an entire village, training for a teacher, or even the installation of “lovely loos” to prevent the spread of cholera and typhoid. But goats and chickens have been the best sellers.

While ethical gift giving may be gaining in popularity, some critics say that these karma boosting stocking stuffers may only work as gimmicks—enticing consumers with cute pictures and overly idealistic promises. They say, without the proper resources, goats can actually be detrimental to the vegetation in rural areas.

So be kind, but beware. The Oxfam website sells its goat care kits (including training, food, water and vet care) separately.

--Caroline Dobuzinskis

Iraq Study Group: "Antidemocratic"

An article in the Christian Science Monitor by Andrew Bacevich, professor of history and international relations at Boston University, calls the Iraq Study Group “antidemocratic.” Bacevich says the group is in place largely to keep citizens’ demands about the war at bay.

Which does beg the question, where has all that citizen anger that was demonstrated on a global scale before the United States invasion of Iraq all gone to? While the war is being widely criticized by media and politicians, voices of dissent in the general public have been quiet. Even after the deadliest month of combat for both American troops and Iraqi civilians, there were no major protests, marches or public outcries calling for an end to the war (with the exception of a Cindy Sheehan led protest on the steps of the Whitehouse that resulted in her arrest on Nov. 9).

Perhaps, as Bacevich suggests, Americans assume the government will take care of it. Or, they are overwhelmed at how badly things have gone. Politicians recently traveling to Iraq experienced shock and awe of their own. After a recent visit to Iraq, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said: "(The Iraqi government) seems to be caught in a crossfire of sectarian angst and violent actions. It’s a dangerous environment that will continue to escalate in the weeks ahead."

Trying to Get the Lead Out in Peru

In our current issue, Sara Shipley Hiles and Marina Walker Guevara investigate how Doe Run, an American mining company, effectively offshored its pollution when it bought a lead smelter in a small city in the Peruvian Andes. Its operation is coating the town of La Oroya in poisonous dust, with devasting effects on the local environment, public health, and especially its kids, many of whom have unacceptably high levels of lead in their systems. Don't miss the story.

But if you want a quick look at what La Oroya looks like and what local residents are saying about the plant, check out this video from Earthjustice, which is part of the legal effort Doe Run to get to clean up its act.

Study Shows Abortion Pill Could Prevent Breast Cancer

A new study just released, reports the Washington Post, shows mifepristone, the active component of the abortion pill regimen RU-486, may stave off breast cancer. The research shows that BRCA1, a gene that causes breast cancer, actually accelerates the production of progesterone (a necessary hormone for pregnant women) in the body. Mifepristone blocks progesterone, and scientists discovered that it was very effective in shutting down cancer-causing genes in mice. It was actually 100% effective. Proponents of RU-486 are hoping that this new advancement will make the drug more available and therefore pave the way for women to use the pill for abortions. Scientists, though, are not yet convinced (and neither should you be-- the long-term effects of RU-486 have not been studied because the drug is meant for one-time use only). There are concerns that long-term use of RU-486 by humans suppresses the immune system and scientists are looking into other progesterone blocking options. So, this is likely not, nor should it be hyped as, the pro-choice ticket to off-label cancer fighting use of RU-486, but, then again, it isn’t bad news for the much maligned abortion pill.

Birth Control or Purity Balls, That is the Question

I wrote last week about the decline in the nation's teen birth rate, and how abstinence groups would try to claim the downturn is the result of chastity pledges and purity rings. (They have, but you need to be an approved member of the Abstinence Clearinghouse to read the "good news.")

Now, the American Journal of Public Health has released a study, Explaining Recent Declines in Adolescent Pregnancy in the United States: The Contribution of Abstinence and Improved Contraceptive Use, that pops that theory. The study's doctors write:

"The current emphasis of U.S. domestic and global policies, which stress abstinence-only sex education to the exclusion of accurate information on contraception, is misguided."

The study, via interviews with nearly 1400 women in 1995 and 1150 in 2002, looks at the relative contribution of abstinence behavior and improved contraceptive use to the recent decline in pregnancy rates (really teen birth rates) among U.S. women between the ages of 15 to 19. Investigators estimate that the likelihood of pregnancy in this age group declined 34 percent between 1995 and 2002, and that 86 percent of the decline in pregnancy risk was attributable to improved use of contraception.

They found that reduced sexual activity explained only 14 percent of the decline in teen pregnancy. To be fair, let it be recalled that abstinence-only ed didn't become a bankrolled operation until 2000. But also to be fair, there has been zero evidence that such education is more effective than comprehensive sex education which includes, gasp, discussion of birth control options.

According to the study, among 18 to 19-year-olds, the decline in pregnancy risk was entirely due to improved contraceptive use, which includes increases in the use of birth control pills, condoms, or both. The study authors conclude:

"These data suggest that the U.S. appears to be following patterns seen in other developed countries where increased availability and increased use of modern contraceptives have been primarily responsible for declines in teenage pregnancy rates...Our findings raise questions about current U.S. government policies that promote abstinence from sexual activity as the primary strategy to prevent adolescent pregnancy."

Questions indeed. They're being polite.

Happy Methday!

For those of you who weren't, um, aware that yesterday was National Methamphetamine Awareness Day, Bill Piper of the Drug Policy Alliance has a holiday card for you. Among his several well-reasoned critiques of our nation's approach to the speed problem - which Piper sums up as "incarcerate as many methamphetamine offenders as possible and hope for the best" - is the nugget that California's policy of diverting low-level offenders into treatment instead of prison has saved taxpayers over one billlion dollars in the last five years.

Calling All Conspiracy Theorists

The Federation of American Scientists' Steven Aftergood unearthed this fascinating nugget in a recent Navy directive on its "Human Research Protection Program," which, much as the name suggests, is tasked with safeguarding human research subjects from inhumane experiments.

The Under Secretary of the Navy (UNSECNAV) is the Approval Authority for research involving... severe or unusual intrusions, either physical or psychological, on human subjects (such as consciousness-altering drugs or mind-control techniques).

Umm, mind control. Part of me is relieved that research, of the Manchurian Candidate variety, if it does indeed exist, requires some form of high level approval. Mostly, though, I'm unnerved by the possibility that government researchers are spending any time whatsoever contemplating this line of inquiry. Perhaps I shouldn't be too surprised. The DoD is known for floating some pretty absurd proposals, such as one in 1994 by researchers at the Air Force's Wright Laboratory who pitched developing "harassing, annoying, and 'bad guy' identifying chemicals." One example:

Chemicals that effect human behavior so that discipline and morale in enemy units is adversely affected. One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior.

Your tax dollars at work folks.

Former Members of Congress, Convicted Of Crimes, Collect Pensions

Former Congresssman Duke Cunningham is in prison, which is a good thing. What isn't such a good thing is that he is collecting a $64,000-a-year pension while he is there, and the amount of the pension will increase as the cost of living goes up. Former Congressman Bob Ney, who pleaded guilty to corruption charges, will get $29,000 a year after he turns 60, and former Congressman Mark Foley, even if he is convicted of a crime, will get $32,000 a year.

Last May, the House of Representatives finally passed a bill that would take pensions away from members who are convicted of bribery or corruption. However, the bill is stalled, and is unlikely to pass before the end of the current session. At any rate, it is not retroactive, so Cunningham and Ney (and possibly Foley) can relax and put their pensions in the bank.

Another problem is that the bill covers only bribery and corruption and not other crimes. Fifteen other disgraced former members of Congress, including convicted Dan Rotstenkowski, collect pensions. Rotstenkowski collects over $100,000 a year, and would have done so even if the House bill had already been made law at the time of his conviction.

We're Still #1 In Prisoners

The United States has been locking up more of its citizens than any other country for some time now - and last year we extended our lead. A record seven million Americans - three per cent of the population - were behind bars, on probation or on parole in 2005, the Department of Justice announced last night. That number includes 2.2 million people currently locked up here in the Land of the Free, despite the fact that crime rates have been falling for over a decade. That gives us an incarceration rate several times higher than that of any Western European country, and far ahead of our closest competitor, liberty-loving Russia.

Headline of the Day

The liberal media strikes again. From page one of today's San Francisco Chronicle:

The article in a nutshell: Bush might still be talking about staying the course in Iraq, but behind the scenes, who knows what the heck he's really thinking or doing? That should be pretty obvious by now, but there's something bracing about seeing that in print in a major newspaper. Even the Chron.

November 30, 2006

Judge Orders FEMA To Resume Post-Hurricane Payments

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the Bush administration violated the Constitution by denying aid to thousands of Gulf Coast residents who were displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Judge Leon ordered FEMA, whom he described as creating a "Kafkaesque" process, to resume payments immediately. The judge pointed out that the agency cut off rental aid without appropriate explanation, and obstructed applicants' due process rights to correct errors or appeal government mistakes.

It is unfortunate, if not incredible, that FEMA and its counsel could not devise a sufficient notice system to spare these beleaguered evacuees the added burden of federal litigation to vindicate their constitutional rights.

720,590 households received rental assitance, but--as of October 19, only 33,889 remained eligible for assistance. Victim advocates maintain that FEMA has resisted calls to provide details about its programs to storm victims, and has created obstacles for those people to obtain government-mandated aid.

FEMA director David Paulison responded by saying he thought the agency had done "a good job."

Criticism of Maliki Not Just From Al Sadr

As I wrote earlier today, Moqtada al Sadr and his followers are not a dissenting voice to be ignored. They criticized Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's meeting with President Bush saying that it was an affront to the Iraqi people. It now appears that al Sadr is not the only voice of opposition to Maliki. Today Sunni Vice President Tariq al Hashemi called for a new government and for a "coalition [to be] put in place with guarantees that ensure collective decision making." (At least someone believes in this.) Deputy Prime Minister Salam Zikam Ali al Zubaie also criticized the Prime Minister saying that his government had not been successful in suppressing sectarian violence. I can't help but think it's no coincidence that this criticism by two top Sunni politicians directly followed Bush's meeting with their superior. Today, President Bush said that we would "stay in Iraq...so long as the government wants us there." I guess that depends on what the meaning of the word "wants" is.

Did the FBI Leave It to Beaver in the Mayfield Case?

In a case that shows quite succinctly that giving up our civil liberties does not make us safer, the FBI has acknowledged that it falsely arrested Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield in conjunction with the 2004 Madrid bombings.

Mayfield, a convert to Islam who has represented terror suspects, became a suspect himself (technically, a material witness) when a partial fingerprint lifted from a bag of detonators was wrongly identified as his. Get this: Three weeks before Mayfield was arrested, Spanish authorities had told the FBI the prints weren't his. But the FBI arrogantly ignored their advice. (Speaking of overconfident disregard of expert advice, see Leigh and Jonathan's posts below.)

The government then jailed Mayfield (he claims he was mistreated in jail), tapped his phone, secretly searched his home without a warrant, and plundered his personal information.

A March report [PDF] by the Justice Department Inspector General found that Patriot Act provisions allowed the FBI to share the results of its fishing expedition with law enforcement and intelligence agents, "amplify[ying] the consequences" for Mayfield of the FBI's amateur mistake.

Now that Mayfield has been cleared, the FBI has apologized and agreed to pay a $2 million settlement. It has also agreed to destroy the information it collected about him. Too bad they can't undo the damage already done.

Voting Machines Get More Than Reasonable Doubt

The ongoing investigation into the disappearance of 18,000 votes in Sarasota, Florida--more than the 369 votes needed to give the November election to Democrat Christine Jennings rather than Republican Vern Buchanan who has been declared winner--is a preview of future debates about electronic voting. And it's not especially reassuring.

The background: Christine Jennings filed suit shortly after the election claiming that an electronic malfunction occurred in Sarasota, where a full 15 percent of voters did not vote in her hotly contested congressional race, compared to 2.5 percent in other Florida districts. Thousands of Sarasota voters have claimed that the race was not on the electronic ballot they were provided. Some have also suggested that their votes simply disappeared.

The state has responded by staging a mock election this Tuesday, in which state employees were the only voters. The employees easily found the Jennings-Buchanan race on the ballot. They admitted, though, it was on the same screen with the gubernatorial race, which featured a larger banner.

Now, even if the only issue was the larger banner, why is it so hard to design a ballot in which voters proceed systematically through all of the races? What's more, anyone who's ever called the office IT guy over to fix their computer only to watch the computer perform perfectly for him knows that computers don't give uniform results to the same prompt. That would be especially true if the voting machines had been programmed to alter the vote tally, as some opponents of electronic voting fear.

Florida's handling of the problem assumes that voting machines are innocent until proven guilty. But machines aren't citizens. The citizens are saying they were unable to vote in the race. What will it take to make people get serious about these problems?

Does the Decider Care What Anyone Thinks?

Surprise, surprise, as Jonathan reports, Bush is choosing to "Go Long" in Iraq. As the New York Times reports today, Bush outright dismissed the early released reports of the Baker Commission's decisions for a withdrawal of U.S. troops. Predictable. Bush said, "We're going to stay in Iraq to get the job done so long as the government wants us there." Which is an unfortunately timed statement given that yesterday Moqtada al Sadr and his followers (which make up 30 parliamentarians and 6 ministers) pulled out of the Iraqi government because of Maliki's meeting with Bush. Now this is not to say that al Sadr (whose militias have been carrying out many of the attacks against the Sunni insurgency) should be driving the decisions of the administration. But he is one of the most powerful if not the most powerful political leader in Iraq and as such, he must be acknowledged. As should the Baker Commission's recommendations, which have been $1 million and more than 7 months in the making.

Boot Camp Guards Charged With Teen's Killing

Eleven months ago, seven guards at a Florida teen-offender "boot camp" were caught on tape kicking and stomping a 14-year-old inmate - who died the next day. The incident led Governor Jeb Bush to dismantle the state's military-style camps for young offenders, cost a top law enforcement officer his job, and have now culminated in manslaughter charges against the guards.

All of which marks the latest and perhaps most serious blow to the once-popular idea of reforming troubled teens in such places. It's an issue Mother Jones highligted several years ago in a piece about the death of another teen in a different boot camp.

More Prisoners (The Non-Secret Kind) Than Ever

A report released today by the Department of Justice shows that the U.S. correctional population (those in jail, prison, probation or on parole) now constitutes fully 3 percent of the U.S. adult population. That's 7 million people, which works out to be one in every 32 Americans.

The report’s findings offer a bleak assessment of state and federal prison systems. Federal prisons are running 34 percent over capacity while several states including South Dakota, Kentucky and Montana saw their inmate populations increase by 10 percent or more.

For women and African Americans the findings are even worse. The number of women in federal and state prisons rose by 2.6 percent (compared to 1.9 percent for men) and 8.1 percent of black men between the ages of 25-29 are now in prison.

—Amaya Rivera

Why Does the Iraq Study Group Even Exist?

Word is out on what James Baker's Iraq Study Group is going to recommend: in short, a slow withdrawal of troops tied to no definite timetable, and a transition to a supporting role in the region.

But, hey, that's not what President Bush wants to hear, so even though the actual report isn't out yet, George gave the group a big middle finger today, all the way from his meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister and walking catastrophe Nouri al-Maliki. "I know there’s a lot of speculation that these reports in Washington mean there’s going to be some kind of graceful exit out of Iraq," said Bush. "We’re going to stay in Iraq to get the job done, so long as the government wants us there."

Oh, I get it. So the only acceptable recommendation from the Iraq Study Group was "stay the course," a phrase and mindset the Administration (apparently fictitiously) abandoned a few weeks back. For all the talk about Bush Sr.'s advisors coming the rescue, you just can't beat George W. Bush's old fashioned hubris, obstinancy, and bull-headedness.

Supremes Run Hot and Cold on CO2 Emissions

Some interesting observations from yesterday's Supreme Court hearing on whether the federal government has the power to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant, via the New York Times. Reading the tea leaves of the justices' reaction to the arguments before them, the Times predicts the court will do its usual 5-4 split on the question, with Anthony Kennedy as the swing vote. John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Antonin Scalia seem to be in the "pollutant, shmollutant" camp:

“You have to show the harm is imminent,” Justice Scalia instructed [Massachussetts assistant attorney general] Mr. Milkey, asking, “I mean, when is the cataclysm?”

Mr. Milkey replied, “It’s not so much a cataclysm as ongoing harm,” arguing that Massachusetts, New York, and other coastal states faced losing “sovereign territory” to rising sea levels. “So the harm is already occurring,” he said. “It is ongoing, and it will happen well into the future.”

Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito both suggested that because motor vehicles account for only about 6 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, even aggressive federal regulation would not be great enough to make a difference, another requirement of the standing doctrine.

Meanwhile, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and David Souter seemed willing to consider that automobile emissions pose a serious environmental threat:

Justice Souter engaged Deputy Solicitor General Gregory G. Garre, the lawyer who was defending the administration’s position, in a long debate. When Mr. Garre said the plaintiffs “haven’t shown specific facts which should provide any comfort to this court that regulation of less than 6 percent or fewer greenhouse emissions worldwide will have any effect on their alleged injuries,” Justice Souter demanded: “Why do they have to show a precise correlation?”

“It is reasonable to suppose,” the justice continued, “that some reduction in the gases will result in some reduction in future loss.” It was “a question of more or less, not a question of either/or,” he said, adding: “They don’t have to stop global warming. Their point is that it will reduce the degree of global warming and likely reduce the degree of loss.”

Mr. Garre replied that given the problem’s global nature, “I’m not aware of any studies available that would suggest that the regulation of that minuscule fraction of greenhouse gas emissions would have any effect whatsoever.”

Then Justice Breyer took on the government lawyer. “Would you be up here saying the same thing if we’re trying to regulate child pornography, and it turns out that anyone with a computer can get pornography elsewhere?” Justice Breyer asked, adding, “I don’t think so.”

Clarence Thomas seems to have been reliably silent during the hearing.

November 29, 2006

Standardized Death Threats

A Los Angeles immigration attorney who has been helping Iraqi Armenian refugees resettle in the U.S. writes that her clients tell her that death threats have become so common that terrorist groups have quit writing them by hand. Instead, they use computer-generated forms with their organization's logo and blank spaces where the victim's name is written in.

Another depressing nugget from her essay:

The United States has not liberalized its refugee policy in response to the worsening crisis in Iraq. More than 1 million Iraqi refugees of all religious backgrounds have poured into Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. In fiscal year 2006, just 202 Iraqi refugees were resettled in the United States.

San Diego Bans Wal-Mart Supercenters

In a victory for low-wage workers, these folks, and for Barack Obama and John Edwards, the San Diego City Council voted Tuesday to ban Wal-Mart Supercenters from their city limits. There are 21 Supercenters in California, but none in San Diego. And San Diego, determined to stay classy, will have none.

Mother Jones has written a ton about Wal-Mart in the past, including this feature on Wal-Mart employees being so fed up with low wages, unpaid overtime, and union busting that they started fighting back, this blog post about how Wal-Mart's claims about going organic are a big fat lie, this blog post about how Wal-Mart could raise wages by more than $2,000 per employee and still maintain profit margins almost 50 percent higher than Costco, this short article about how Rick Santorum sided with Wal-Mart over his own beleaguered constituents, this essay about how Wal-Mart's "Made in America" claims are deceitful and disgusting, and on and on. Good on ya', San Diego. For being one of the most conservative parts of California, sometimes you're all right.

Saudi Arabia Plans to Protect Sunni Minority

The U.S. is not the only country crafting the fate of Iraq (The Baker Commission's report is set to be released a week from today). Today Reuters reports that Nawaf Obaid, a security adviser to the Saudi government, writing in the Washington Post said that the Saudi government has plans of their own. Obaid writes that if the U.S. begins to withdraw from Iraq, Saudi Arabia plans to protect the Sunni minority from "Iranian-baked shiite militias." The Saudi options are three-fold, much like those of the Pentagon-- although without all those clever names:

-providing "Sunni military leaders (primarily ex-Baathist members of the former Iraqi officer corps, who make up the backbone of the insurgency) with" funding and arms.

-establishing Sunni brigades

-strangling "Iranian funding of the militias through oil policy."

Throughout the Middle East, there is a well-founded fear that the blood of the escalating violence will spill over into the countries that border Iraq, creating even more instability in the region, so the Saudi's interest in helping out is understandable. Although the influence of neighbors does not come without ulterior motives (nor, of course, does the U.S.'s). Liz Sly, a reporter for the Chicago Tribune put it quite well back in October when in response to federalizing Iraq, she said that "While more engagement by Iraq's neighbors might help promote unity, there is also a risk that neighboring states will seek to pursue their own agendas and turn the country into a regional battleground." I think it's safe to say, as many have already done so, that the fear of civil war could soon be trumped by fears of a regional one.

What Kim Jong Il Won’t be Getting for Christmas

Kim Jong Il has made a sport of defying U.S. efforts to halt his country’s burgeoning nuclear program, essentially thumbing his nose at the international community in October by staging North Korea’s first nuclear test. Today, after the U.S. government’s latest diplomatic overture failed, the Bush administration was forced to take swift and decisive action intended to hit Kim where it hurts – that is, to cut off exports of luxury goods, such as yachts, plasma TVs, Rolexes, and iPods to North Korea in conjunction with the U.N. Also embargoed is Kim’s favorite French cognac, Hennessy, which is certain to agitate “Dear Leader,” who is reputed to purchase upwards of $700,000 per year of the stuff. As the AP points out, these trade sanctions seem squarely targeted at Kim, a connoisseur of the finer things in life, who’s one of the few people in the impoverished nation who can afford to indulge his taste for extravagances. It remains to be seen whether this effort will bring North Korea back into the diplomatic fold. But one would think that Kim, whose regime has successfully negotiated the nuclear black market, probably won’t have a great deal of trouble getting his hands on some outlawed hooch.

Pop Quiz: Who Is the Lamest Duck?

The New York Times got hold of a secret memo in which National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley describes the lameness of a world leader. Who is it?

"He impressed me as a leader who wanted to be strong but was having difficulty figuring out how to do so."

"The information he receives is undoubtedly skewed by his small circle of [deleted word] advisers, coloring his actions and interpretation of reality."

"The reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests [name deleted] is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."

"He may simply not have the political or security capabilities to take such steps, which risk alienating his narrow [deleted word] political base."

Sounds familiar, right? Of course I gamed the quotes by deleting the words Dawa, Maliki, and Sadrist, but it still made me wonder if Hadley was painting a portrait of Maliki in terms that he thought Bush might understand.

Full text of Hadley's brutally honest November 8 Maliki memo for cabinet-level officials here.

Powell: We Should Call it Civil War

CNN's Hala Gorani reports today that in conversation, Colin Powell told her that "if he were still heading the State Department, he probably would recommend to the Bush administration that those terms [civil war] should be used in order to come to terms with the reality on the ground."

This debate of whether or not to finally apply the label "civil war" began with the eruption of violence over the weekend, with CNN's Michael Ware reporting, "For the people living on the streets, for Iraqis in their homes, if this is not civil war, or a form of it, then they do not want to see what one really looks like.... We're talking about Sunni neighborhoods shelling Shia neighborhoods, and Shia neighborhoods shelling back."

Soon after, NBC decided it would use the phrase, Dan Froomkin nodded approvingly, and we were off to the races. The Nation writes today that this may signal the true awakening of the mainstream media.

The real confusion here, of course, lies in the fact that no firm or commonly accepted definition of "civil war" exists, coupled with the fact that we live in time in which words and phrases, bent in a million different ways and co-opted for the purposes of spin, retain little meaning. Unsurprisingly, The Daily Show makes this point best.

2008 Prez Candidates Update

Movement amongst the longshots. Joe Biden is in, though we kind of already knew that. Bill Frist, officially the least lik