MotherJones.com | MoJoBlog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: December 17, 2006

« December 10, 2006 - December 16, 2006 | Main | December 24, 2006 - December 30, 2006 »

December 22, 2006

McCain Goes Looking In Slime Pool For More Questionable Staff Members

Sen. John McCain's recent hiring of Karl Rove protege Terry "Call me" Nelson didn't surprise those of us who have never bought into the "straight talker," "maverick" image that has been manufactured by McCain and his supporters. Now McCain has hired yet another morally-challenged staff member, Jill Hazelbaker, as communications director for his New Hampshire campaign.

Hazelbaker is known for posing as a liberal and stirring up trouble on liberal blogs. She was caught, too, but continued to lie about what she had done. These kinds of campaign dirty tricks, recently popularized by Rove and Karen Hughes, are probably pretty common, but in this case, the selection of both Hazelbaker and Nelson tell more about McCain than anything else.

Goodbye, Future Daughter

Many lesbians have historically adopted Chinese babies. Lesbians, as Elizabeth Weil reported this summer, are sometimes turned away from fertility clinics. And sometimes, they make an ethical/political choice to adopt one of China's unwanted baby girls. Chinese orphans are predominantly girls because the country has long limited families to one child, and most families wait for a boy.

Many gay men also adopt babies from China, even though the country doesn't make it easy for same-sex couples. Just 8 percent of the nation's orphans are available to so-called single-parent homes and all applicants must sign a statement saying they are not gay or lesbian.

Now China is making its adoption laws even stricter. The country will no longer permit any single parents to adopt. The new rules announced yesterday will also bar those who are obese or over 50, those whose net worth is under $80,000, those who have been in a second marriage for less than five years, or those who—like millions of Americans—take medication for depression or anxiety. Although 12,000 Chinese orphans are expected to be adopted this year—two-thirds of them by Americans—the number of orphans will likely decrease as China continues to relax its one-child rule.

This writer has long thought that any babies in his future would come from China. It seems they won't after all.

Squid Gives Me Pause

I may have been too harsh in my last blog post. That giant squid story is actually kind of neat.

In Light of Haditha, Revisiting How Marines Train to Interact with Iraqi Civilians

Today's newspapers bring an update on the Haditha massacre. Four Marines are charged with murder for the killings of two dozen Iraqi civilians, including at least 10 women and children, in the Iraqi village last year. Four officers are also charged with failing to investigate and report the incident. (Odd note: As of 11:09 am PST, the CNN.com homepage has no news of this. However, "Rosie vs. The Donald" and "Giant squid filmed, captured" do make the list.)

The charges are harsh, and may indicate the first signs of real accountability within the military. The NY Times quotes a West Point law professor as saying, "This is very aggressive charging — wow... I think this illustrates the deep seriousness the Marine Corps takes with these events... I definitely think the Marine Corps is sending a message to commanders."

In light of all this, we'd like to turn your attention to a Mother Jones magazine story called "Lost in Translation: The challenges of training GIs to avoid insulting — and shooting — Iraqi civilians are being faced in California's Mojave Desert." Writer Brian Palmer visited a Marine base called Twentynine Palms and watched as young Marines trained for high-intensity civilian-interaction situations, with sometimes uplifting and sometimes distressing results. From Palmer's report:

The exercise merges traditional training and a brand-new series of simulations and classes for Iraq-bound Marines, with an emphasis on evoking the intensity of actual combat in a credibly simulated Iraqi village. The goal, said Captain Jonathan Smith, Fox Company's commanding officer, is to make each soldier "a combat vet before they get in country." Improvised explosive devices made with black powder and compressed air actually go "boom" and sometimes injure people. Marines and "insurgents" fire "sim rounds," bullets with paintball-type tips that, according to the grunts, hurt like hell. Iraqi role players speak only Arabic. Classes in language, culture, civil affairs, and policing are held alfresco before combat simulations, and instructors race through information at mind-boggling speed. One Arabic language lesson covered four words—"explosives," "rocket," "mine," and "weapons"—and lasted two minutes and 21 seconds.

...

Two different instructors backed up this scenario with a stunning statistic: "Over the last 12 months or so we killed about 1,000 Iraqis at blocking positions and checkpoints," the first coyote told the grunts. "About 60—six-zero—we could demonstrate that, yeah, he was a bad guy, he was an insurgent. Six-zero out of about 1,000. So if we don't communicate what we want them to do, all we're doing is creating more enemies." The second instructor later offered up the same figures, concluding: "So obviously, 900-something innocent Iraqis have been killed. That's pretty shitty numbers, right?"

It's good. Read the whole thing.

Free Copies of An Inconvenient Truth— Get 'Em While They're Hot!

A couple of weeks ago, the National Science Teachers Association refused a donation of copies of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, lest its factually challenged donors, such as Exxon, were offended. Now, Participant Productions, the film's distributor, is giving away 50,000 copies to teachers who sign up here. And, via BoingBoing, we learn that the guys who run the less-than-educational website, HotOrNot have pitched in $25K to help get the effort off the ground. And if you want to oggle and do good, there's always Al Gore's Hot or Not page.

Gunboat Diplomacy Means We Aren't Bombing Iran

A few days ago, I remarked on an astonishing report coming out of the Pentagon indicating that the military is considering a buildup of Navy forces in the Persian Gulf as a show of strength against Iran. In a cheeky aside, I said, "Thanks for suggesting diplomacy with these folks, Iraq Study Group. Now get out of town."

I should have been more cautious. As Laura Rozen explains in the American Prospect's online edition today, sending naval forces to Iran's backyard is a form of diplomacy: "Gunboat Diplomacy."

Rozen quotes an unnamed official:

"The idea is definitely to keep the Iranians aware that there is a price to pay for their policies and the U.S. is not rolling over... The Iranians are being unhelpful in funding and supporting people blowing coalition forces up in Iraq… [The announced US actions] are to say, ‘We have teeth, we have force. You shouldn’t think we’re some paper tiger.'"

First of all, how funny is the use of the word "unhelpful"? Iran is funding Shiite death squads and "blowing coalition forces up in Iraq." Unhelpful, indeed. An Iranian close to the administration tells Rozen that the buildup of troops would largely be "intimidation" and that America "needs all the demonstration of strength she could muster, should she decide to start talks with Iran." The take-home message is that it is possible sending warships to the gulf is not the first sign of a regional conflagration, but instead the inevitable posturing that comes before negotiation. We can only hope.

For Mother Jones content on the possibility of war with Iran, see the list of stories at this link.

World War III: Saudi Arabia vs. Iran?

Not to oversensationalize or anything, but it is a little unsettling when the Saudis let it be known (as they have for some time now) that if (and that's not really a very big if, is it?) Iran goes nuclear, they will too... and that they would not hesitate to intervene in Iraq's civil war on the side of the Sunnis if Shia power gets too great... and when, at the same time, the office of the Vice President comes down hard in favor of a Shia government in Iraq, butchery of Sunnis notwithstanding... and when, finally, news that there's a major struggle going on in the Saudi government over "a clash of civilizations" with Iran is buried on Page 14 in the New York Times. Peace on earth, everyone.

December 21, 2006

Scary Science & the Solstice

The BBC reports on a British government study looking ahead to the next 50 years:

”Robots could one day demand the same citizen's rights as humans… If granted, countries would be obliged to provide social benefits including housing and even "robo-healthcare."

I suppose British robots might get somewhere with that. American ones would be SOL.

NewScientist reports it’s so warm bears aren’t hibernating in Spain this winter. Though a Japanese man apparently pulled off the torpid feat for three rip-van-winkle weeks.

If you’re in the southern hemisphere, in, say, Madagascar, this solstice and planning a balmy night under the stars without a tent, reconsider. Imagine, moths that breach your eyelids and drink your tears while you sleep. Well, birds’ tears at any rate. The moths are apparently after salt not liquid. Nevertheless, it looks unnerving, the moths and their harpoonlike proboscises:

If that's too creepy, check out the University of Alaska’s Geophysical Institute’s online aurora borealis forecast, and plan your trip north accordingly. After all, how many more years do you want to pass without seeing this wonder?

Happy Solstice.

New Evidence on the Prevalence of Robo-Calls

Turns out, our strenuous coverage of the robo-call issue during the mid-term elections was unnecessary: if you're a voting American, you likely experienced robo-calls first hand!

A new poll by the Pew Internet and American Life project says 64% of registered voters received at least one robo-call during election season. From Pew's brief summary:

These so-called “robo-calls” were the second most popular way for campaigns and political activists to reach voters, trailing only direct mail as a key tool of political communication. Some 71% of registered voters got direct mail campaign solicitations, while 24% received phone calls from real human beings urging their vote for a particular candidate, 18% were visited at their homes, and 14% received email solicitations.

As TPMmuckraker notes, we still don't know how many people received the harassing robo-calls that called six, seven, or eight times in a row, in a GOP ploy to discourage Democratic turnout.

Wonkette: "If You're Wondering What Victory in Iraq Looks Like..."

A link too good to pass up. For the world's saddest victory celebration (we handed Najaf to the Iraqis), see this Wonkette post. To be frank, the keyboardist -- who actually has a day's work -- looks more grateful than the stiff-as-a-board Iraqi politicians who have to clean up this mess.

Update: MoJo intern Celia Perry adds the following: The AP reports that during the ceremony commemorating the return of Najaf to local control, "a small group of [Iraqi] soldiers stepped forward with a live rabbit and tore it to pieces. The leader bit out the heart with a yell, then passed around the blood-soaked remains to his comrades, each of whom took a bite. The group also bit the heads off frogs, as some of those in the crowd held their noses from the stench." Later, police drove in shiny new vehicles around a track littered with fur and frog legs. Apparently, chewing on live animals is a traditional display of ferocity that was used by elite military units during Saddam Hussein’s regime. I guess old habits die hard.

Update II: Apparently the celebration was bigger than the picture at Wonkette would suggest. From the AP story mentioned above: "About 1,500 police officers, soldiers and security personnel staged a parade around an infield of stubby brown grass, in festivities complete with warriors on horseback."

Nature is a Vengeful Creature

Two for the irony department.

Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma is America's foremost global warming denier (he called global warming "the greatest hoax every perpetrated on the American people" and compared global warming warnings to the deceptions of the Third Reich), and as the chairman of the Environment and Public Works committee is probably more responsible than anyone except President Bush for America's inaction on the subject. Well, God or Nature or someone is pissed off, and it/they know exactly who to go after.

Oklahoma, it seems, is experiencing the worst drought conditions and wildfires in the United States. Nine and a half million acres have been burned by wild fires nationwide in 2006, a record. One could say proof of global warming is shining Inhofe in the face like sun glare off a prairie highway.

But the irony doesn't end there. Australia, the only industrialized country other than the United States not to have ratified the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is experiencing its worst drought in 1,000 years. Predictably, losses in crop production have resulted in the slowest economic growth in recent years. More from the very good Climate Progress and "As the World Burns," Mother Jones' 2005 package on global warming.

By the way, considering how things have gone for Oklahoma and Australia, it is only a matter of time until a lightening bolt hits Air Force One or a mudslide buries Michael Crichton's house. I say this for your own safety, Mr. President: please do something. We don't want you to end up like this man.

Oh, So That's Why

Apparently, the reason certain American states may play such a decisive role in the nation’s political elections may be their powerful position according to the rules of feng shui:

Cho Jun Hyung, a retired television station manager turned feng shui master, says [incoming UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon’s] appearance fulfilled a 2,500-year-old Chinese prophecy, first uttered by Confucius himself, that a "world dominator" would emerge from the northeast, meaning neighboring Korea. Cho says Sangdong has exceptionally good feng shui because it sits at the navel of the Korean Peninsula, and a nearby row of three mountains channel in natural forces.

"This is very rare geography," he said. "In America, Massachusetts and Ohio have similar alignments, which is why they produce so many presidents."

Troops as Props: Decoding the Press Reports From Gates' Trip to Iraq

What a strange little world the traveling press is. On Wednesday, an AP story led with the sentence, "Defense Secretary Robert Gates found American commanders wary of a proposal to rush more U.S. troops to Iraq as he visited the war-ravaged country." The body of the story was the same rundown of "will-he-or-won't-he" material: Bush is considering sending more troops, which means Gates is considering sending more troops, Gen. Casey says this, Gen. Abizaid says this, yada yada. The only new nugget was in the lede: commanders on the ground, to whom Bush promised to listen, don't really buy the idea. Not good for the Bushies, if they know sending more troops is likely, or inevitable.

And then this morning, a new AP story with the lede, "U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the rest of the Bush administration may be undecided on whether to send more troops to Iraq. But several soldiers he met with at Camp Victory here on Thursday morning said extra forces would help."

The story makes note of the dissonance between the commanders' feelings and the troops' feelings, but I can't help but feel the press has been suckered. Was this a PR job intended to repair the damage of Wednesday's story? The military knew the press would be watching Gates eat his scrambled eggs with the soldiers; in fact, the military probably invited the press and made sure they'd be there. Were the soldiers selected because their viewpoints were likely to match the message the military wanted to get out? Or worse, were they coached? It's not like this would be the first time the administration used the troops as props in a media stunt.

Maybe the soldiers on the ground really do wish they had more of their colleagues helping out. It's not surprising: why wouldn't they want someone to share the burden on a difficult and unwinnable situation? But Nick Kristof noted in February that a poll examining soldiers' opinions on the war found 72 percent wanted to withdraw in a year and 29 percent wanted to withdraw immediately. So we're expected to believe that it just so happened that Gates met with a crowd of soldiers and every one present was in the minority of troops that wants to prolong the war? Smells as rotten as a fake turkey.

December 20, 2006

Hillary Hearts the Holidays: Senator Clinton Visits "The View"

What War on Christmas? Hillary hit the couch on "The View" this morning as part of a PR blitz for the reissue of It Takes a Village. Her big revelation? That "we are probably as fanatic about Christmas as anybody you'll meet." Really? Have you met Melody Howell, who decorates her home with 52 fresh-cut Christmas trees, including one in her bathtub? Now that is Christmas fighting back with the big guns.

The Viewsters did try to ask Hillary the big questions, with Joy Behar asking if she was sorry for voting for the Iraq War (and getting the usual "if we had known then..."), and guest host Crystal McCrary Anthony asking the world's most torturous version of "are you running?" Crystal's wind-up was so labored that she gave Hillary lots of lifelines to grab; Hillary went with some blather about the "hyper-connectedness" of today's world, which gave her ample opportunity to be worried "for our kids," bringing us back safely to It Takes a Village territory. Responding to the question of whether we are ready for a female president, Hillary made the point that there's only one way to find out, but conceded: "It's such a leap of faith, and I'm well aware of that—it's way out there."

But line of the day goes to Rosie, who capped a discussion of Hillary's love of crafts (hey, it was "The View," not "Meet the Press") with "you'd be surprised how crafty she is." Yep, the ability to take the innocuous and turn it into a backstabbing—now that is presidential. You heard it here first: Rosie for President!

Shop for America! (It's a Very GWB Christmas!)

In light of George W. Bush's recent instruction that Americans do their part to hold off economic recession by shopping more, Mother Jones brings you a collection of GWB action figures and dolls -- perfect for that unreconstructed hawk or delusional hard-line right-winger on your gift list!

First, the "Top Gun" George W. Bush 12-inch action figure:

Says the product description: "Comes dressed in a full flight suit, helmet, goggles, breather, and tanks that are identical to the ones George Bush wore when he landed on the flight deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln." Who doesn't want to relive that great moment in American history! Can we get some boilerplate hero-worship, please? "Lambasted by his political critics for using the opportunity to boost his political career, President Bush remained as unflappable as ever. His flight outfit features pouches, pockets, straps, buckles, and all the accessories of an original. This item does not talk." Even better!

Also comes with "Turkey Dinner" George W. Bush, commemorating the time our President surprised the troops in Iraq with a Thanksgiving visit carrying a fake turkey! Hooray for photo ops!

Up next is "Elite Force Aviator" George W. Bush:

This 12-inch action figure is a "meticulous 1:6 scale recreation of the Commander-in-Chief's appearance during his historic Aircraft Carrier landing." Oh no, not that again! How does it compare to our first action figure? "The realism and exacting attention to detail demanded by today's 12-inch action figure enthusiast are met and exceeded with this action figure." Well, if you're an "action figure enthusiast," maybe you'll want two!

Third in line is Frowny Face President Bush:

Ever wanted to hear an unhappy-looking doll with a massive tie and crazy shoelaces tell you that he is "glad to be in the midst of patriots"? Then this is the doll for you! Comes with a biographical pamphlet detailing George W. Bush's life before he was a disastrous president!

And finally, the Mr. Eloquence President Bush:

How many times have you given an all-American child an all-American doll on Christmas, only to find out the doll was made in China? Well, no problem here! This doll speaks, and it actually says, "I come from Texas." It also says, "...working hard to put food on your family." Countries get the leaders they deserve, and people who want this gift probably won't know what that means!

* Brought to you by Liberal Bloggers Fighting the War on Christmas.

The Mysterious Case of the Disappearing Reports

The Bush Administration has made a habit of discontinuing regularly-produced studies and reports that reflect poorly on its performance. TPMmuckraker has put together a list, and we have an addition. Some from their list, which started at the Carpetbagger Report:

In March, the administration announced it would no longer produce the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation, which identifies which programs best assist low-income families, while also tracking health insurance coverage and child support.

In 2005, after a government report showed an increase in terrorism around the world, the administration announced it would stop publishing its annual report on international terrorism.

When Bush’s Department of Education found that charter schools were underperforming, the administration said it would sharply cut back on the information it collects about charter schools.

In December 2002, the administration curtailed funding to the Mass-Layoffs Statistics program, which released monthly data on the number and size of layoffs by U.S. companies. His father attempted to kill the same program in 1992, but Clinton revived it when he assumed the presidency.

As for our entry. In January 2006 we noted that the Bush Administration's reaction to the lack of progress women have made in the workplace is to stop collecting the facts: "Under Bush, the Labor Dept. has eliminated 25 publications on pay inequity and child care."

The source is a report titled "MISSING: Information About Women's Lives," which can be found here [pdf]. From the introduction: "Vital data have been deleted, buried, altered, or otherwise gone missing from government websites and publications: priorities have changed, funding cut, research findings distorted, important social differences masked, critical committees and programs dismantled."

Who Will Stop the Drunk Pilot, Flying Solo over Iraq?

Last week, in my local vegetarian co-op, there was a sign that said "Troops HOME by Christmas." I was disgusted, and blamed the sign-posters for giving leftists a bad name. If the troops had left Iraq the day after I saw the sign, they wouldn't have been home—or even in the U.S.—by Christmas. More importantly, the time for opposing Bush just to oppose Bush is over. It's time to figure out what we should actually do in Iraq.

So my first response to Bush's decision to increase the size of the armed forces, announced yesterday, wasn't complete outrage. Bush hasn't officially said he will send more troops to Iraq, but the sequence of events—Rumsfeld's departure, an announcement that Bush will not follow the Iraq Study Group's recommendations, a Pentagon leak that top brass is advocating a bigger standing military, repeated reports that Bush is considering sending more troops, and General Abizaid's impending retirement—certainly suggests that is what he will do. If sending more troops is the best way to get out of Iraq without leaving a regional bloodbath in our wake, then we should do it.

However, the sources that have proven themselves most reliable on Iraq are against the deployment of more troops. Colin Powell. The Iraq Study Group. The Joint Chiefs of Staff. General Abizaid (not that he's especially credible, but he is on the ground in Iraq). They don't think more troops can contain the chaos clutching Iraq. Hell, I don't know what will fix Iraq, but I'm pretty confident the president doesn't, either. By ignoring the professional advice Bush finally admitted he needed, the president is leaving himself with absolutely no alibi for failure. We're peering over an historical precipice.

We also tried throwing more troops at our last ideological war, Vietnam. This morning, as I rode the bus to work, there were two Vietnam vets chatting—one in a wheelchair, the other with a cane.

Wheelchair vet: Just think, we've probably being doing serious damage to our lungs for about 40 years now. You probably started smoking in Nam like I did, right?

Cane vet: Yup.

Wheelcair vet: It seemed like a good idea at the time. I could take a 10 minute break from policing or unloading trucks.

Cane vet (who is manly and handsome, but looks to be on the verge of tears during the entire conversation): They found a spot on my lung.

Wheelchair vet: That doesn't mean anything. Only about 40 percent of them are cancer. It could just be damage to your lungs. You're getting counseling right? I mean, I get counseling and antidepressants.

Cane vet: Yeah, they have me on Paxil.

Wheelchair vet: It's funny, after two back surgeries and the fact that I can't walk, it was for depression and PTSD that they finally gave it [disability compensation?] to me. But you know, once you're on anti-depressants, you have to take them forever. I was reading a Toronto study that said people get psychotic if they stop taking Paxil. You'll basically be a Paxil addict your whole life.

Cane vet: Mmm. I was taking one a day, now I'm taking two.

A few stops later, the vet with the cane comes back and quietly unhooks the vet in the wheelchair from the bus seat. They both get off and go their separate ways.

Sending more troops in will create a whole generation of men like this: physically and mentally broken, betrayed by their country. And, unless Bush's last ditch effort is successful despite the chorus of predictions to the contrary, it will also create a new set of killing fields. This isn't about George W. Bush anymore, or our military pride. It's much bigger. Will we stand by and watch, muttering "I told you so"?

Pentagon Preparing "Show of Force" Against Iran; MoJo is All Over the Story

The AP is reporting that the Pentagon is considering "a major buildup of U.S. Navy forces in the Gulf as a show of force against Iran." While seemingly insane -- Thanks for suggesting diplomacy with these folks, Iraq Study Group. Now get out of town. -- this should come as no surprise to regular Mother Jones readers.

In July 2006, we published "Next We Take Tehran: The confrontation with Iran has very little to do with nukes—and a lot with the agenda of empire."

Also in July 2006, we published "Three Days in Rome: In which a neoconservative jack-of-all-trades, a pair of Pentagon hawks, and an Iranian exile with a knack for tall tales try to outflank the CIA and conjure a coup in Tehran."

In October 2006, we published "Meet the "Whack Iran" Lobby: Exiles peddling shaky intelligence, advocacy groups pressing for regime change, neocons bent on remaking the Middle East. Sound familiar?"

And also in October 2006, we published "Has Washington Found its Iranian Chalabi?: Introducing the talented Mr. Fakhravar."

So get educated! (Oh, and in a recent issue of Vanity Fair, Frank Gaffney, assistant secretary of defense under Reagan and president of the hawkish Center for Security Policy, which has close ties to the top levels of the Pentagon, said, "I would say that the likelihood of military action against Iran is 100 percent." So there you go.)

Gen. John Abizaid, Who Opposes Sending More Troops to Iraq, to Retire

There are two possible explanations for the impending retirement of Army General John Abizaid, who currently commands all U.S. troops in the Middle East.

The first is that Abizaid has led the fight in Iraq for three years and we've lost thousands of lives and moved backwards over that time (see graphic on left side at this link), to the point where, amazingly, the most stubborn-minded segments of American society are admitting we're not winning. Even in an administration where accountability doesn't exist, those responsible for failure sometimes leave on their own.

The second is that Abizaid opposes adding more troops to the war effort, saying publicly that it will exacerbate problems in country. Since Bush and the Pentagon are formulating plans to send more troops to Iraq, Abizaid may be receiving the boot out of respect or out of a desire to make the troop movement easier.

Who knows? Maybe Abizaid will write a book telling all, like his predecessor. All we do know is that he'll get a fancy award.

December 19, 2006

The Muslims Are Coming!--Rep. Goode Freaks Out

Virgil Goode, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia, is concerned about immigration. "I fear," he said in a letter to his constituents, "that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt strict immigration policies."

Goode also made a reference to newly elected Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, a Muslim, and asked Americans to "wake up" or more Muslims will be elected to office. He warned:

I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.

Goode has proposed an amendment to the Constitution to make English the official language of the United States. Part of his reasoning is that if things continue to go as they are, language-wise, we could wind up like Canada.

My personal fear is that, in the next century, we will have many more Congressional bigots in the United States.

American Apparel Sells Out; Cashes In

American Apparel, the cotton t-shirt, underwear, and socks company made famous by risqué ads and forward-thinking labor practices, will be sold to Endeavor Acquisition Corp, reportedly for $382.5 million. After the transition to new ownership, American Apparel founder and president Dov Charney, who freely admits to sleeping with employees and hiring girls on the spot in nightclubs, will continue to manage the company’s 145 stores.

American Apparel is a rare business success story among a field of still-born garment firms sporting decent labor practices. Other high-minded startups, such as worker-owned cooperative Sweat-X, which drew venture capital from Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream, have tried to upset the sweatshop model in recent years, to no avail. Sweat-X, for example, had to close their doors in 2004 after some bad luck and poor marketing, despite rules limiting compensation for managers at eight times the wages of those working the sewing machines. (See an interesting documentary called No Sweat for a comparison of the inner-workings of Sweat-X and American Apparel.)

If you have not been keeping tabs, American Apparel has a mixed social record at best. On the one hand, seamstresses are known to receive massages, low-cost health care plans, and free classes in English, but flamboyant owner Dov Charney has been criticized for hindering employee efforts to unionize and several employees have charged him with sexual harassment.

Indeed, sleazy owner-operator Charney seems to run the company as if it his own Bacchinalian bachelor pad: he personally photographs many of the company's young models in amateur-porn-like settings. He has given a vibrator to at least one female employee, has posted covers from Penthouse magazine on store walls, and famously masturbated while being interviewed by a reporter from Jane magazine. In photo shoots, Charney, not surprisingly, favors a fair share of crotch-shots. The recent sell-out is just the last of many signs that American Apparel is far more about satisfying the whims of its founder than making the garment industry more humane.

Whether one believes that Dov Charney has simply traded one form of the exploitation for another -- substituting his sexual reign for the tyranny of sweatshops -- American Apparel's legacy will be determined by Endeavor Acquisitions, which saw its stock shoot up 22 percent after announcing the buyout.

-- Jen Phillips and Koshlan Mayer-Blackwell

In the Battle for the Public's Right to Know, ACLU Wins a Round

Count one for the good guys. In the government's ongoing fight to control information in the public sphere, someone with the right combination of chutzpah, legal expertise, and media savvy finally got the government to back down in a stand off.

That "someone," of course, was the ACLU, who as of late has be enmeshed in a battle with federal prosecutors over a document detailing the Army's new internal regulations on photographing detainees. (The document is now available on the ACLU website and is relatively harmless.)

What's remarkable is that there is no national security justification for suppressing the document. It was a use of the legal apparatus by the government to quash unflattering news, which is pretty draconian. Of course, the ACLU has some boasting to do: "This was a legal stand-off with enormous implications for free speech and the public's right to know, and today the government blinked," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "The Bush Administration's attempt to suppress information using the grand jury process was truly chilling and is unprecedented in law and in our history as an organization. We could not be more pleased to have turned back the government from its strong-arm tactics."

This is part and parcel with the Bush Administration's fight with the press. "In this case," said Floyd Abrams, a First Amendment lawyer, "the ACLU's function is presslike" in that is acts as a government watchdog and delivers important information to the public. A while back, Mother Jones mentioned that the number of subpoenas that the Heart Co. has received of its lawyers has increased twentyfold over the last few years. Other examples of press suppression abound, which is why the United States tied for 53rd in the last Press Freedom Rankings.

Brownback: Judicial Activism A-OK When It Favors Austere Religious Values

Senator Sam Brownback, a Kansas Republican who sits on the Judiciary Committee, was holding up a roster of 13 judicial nominees by refusing to vote on the appointment of Judge Janet Neff to a Federal District Court. Yesterday, he relented, agreeing to vote on the nomination.

Brownback was stonewalling, as it were, because he had learned that Neff had attended the (lesbian) commitment ceremony of a longtime neighbor's daughter. That's right, Neff was a guest at one same-sex ceremony. Brownback had graciously offered to move forward if only Neff would agree to recuse herself from all cases related to same-sex unions.

Let's follow this to its illogical extreme. Any judicial nominee who has attended a party sponsored by Budweiser or Absolut must recuse him or herself from all cases related to the alcohol industry. Any nominee who has hugged a woman or in anyway offered support after an abortion must recuse him or herself from all cases related to Roe v. Wade. And so on.

In some cases, more judicial independence could be a good thing. But Brownback hasn't taken that position in the past. Indeed, he has supported appointees who had been outspoken opponents of abortion and same-sex marriage but claimed they would rule based on their legal expertise, rather than their personal opinions. Neff, who hasn't made any outspoken claims supporting or opposing same-sex marriage, has, however, said that her legal expertise would guide her through any decisions on the matter.

What's more, legal scholars have voiced widespread concern that Senator Brownback's request that Neff agree, as a condition of his vote, to handle cases in a certain way is unconstitutional.

When (metaphorically) confronted with a copy of the constitution, Brownback was unabashed. He indicated that he needed more reassurance from Judge Neff that her presence at the ceremony did not indicate insurmountable bias. Brownback would now like Neff to testify before the Senate about her neighbor's ceremony. Neff, and everyone else involved in the private commitment ceremony, are now essentially on trial.

Compare Brownback's single-handed delay of the Senate's confirmation process to the suits filed by Gov. Mitt Romney and Vote on Marriage claiming that the Massachusetts legislature violated their right to due process by tabling an anti-gay marriage amendment. It doesn't take long to see that their homophobia is making a perverse mockery of democracy.

MoJo's Best of Books, Music, Television and Film, 2006

Just in time for the holidays (and holiday shopping), Mother Jones presents our list of 2006 media favorites. We think you'll like these books, albums, shows, and movies; act fast, before the War on Christmas ruins the gift-giving season for everyone.

Our Town: A Heartland Lynching, a Haunted Town, and the Hidden History of White America. By Cynthia Carr. A photograph of a 1930 Indiana lynching is the central mystery and motivating force behind Our Town. As Carr tries to figure out what really happened on the night captured in the picture, she uncovers her own family’s shameful history. One of the most fascinating and challenging explorations of race to arrive in a long time.

Rip It Up and Start Again: Postpunk 1978-1984. By Simon Reynolds. Reynolds convincingly argues that ’80s postpunk was the most fertile and influential musical period since the Summer of Love. Encompassing everything from Joy Division to Gang of Four to the Specials to Talking Heads to (gasp!) Human League—it’s the perfect nostalgia trip for the perennial grad student who still rocks the stovepipe jeans.

The Discomfort Zone. By Jonathan Franzen. The novelist recounts his childhood fears (“spiders, insomnia, fish hooks, school dances, hardball, heights, bees, urinals, puberty, music teachers, dogs, the school cafeteria, censure, older teenagers, jellyfish, locker rooms, boomerangs, popular girls”), awkward adolescence, and adulthood struggle to become a wildly successful writer. Along the way, he discovers bird-watching, which becomes an obsession and his connection to environmentalism.

Pick a Bigger Weapon. The Coup. This Oakland rap duo has been around since the early ’90s, but this album, its first in five years, is the most musically rich. Not that the group has smoothed down its political edge. (Sample lyrics: "War ain’t about one land against the next/it’s po’ people dyin’ so the rich cash checks.") And don’t miss the catchy pre-apocalyptic slow jam, "BabyLetsHaveABabyBeforeBushDoSomethingCrazy."

The Information. Beck. Moving past Guero’s cheesier, poppier tunes, Beck offers honest yet fresh melodies without sacrificing the succinct beats we’ve come to expect. And how can you resist an album that comes with D.I.Y. cover art and features the line, "Carry my heart like a soldier with a hand grenade"?

This Film Is Not Yet Rated. Director Kirby Dick goes on an undercover quest to expose the opacity and hypocrisy of the the folks who decide whether to slap a PG, R, or a distribution-killing NC-17 on our movies. For his trouble, he earned a NC-17, but don't let that scare you away.

For the full list, go here.

Family of Sen. Tim Johnson Expects Full Recovery

News out of South Dakota, where the Argus Leader talks with recovering Senator Tim Johnson's son. To the block quotes!

[Said Brendan Johnson,] "From my conversations with the doctors and based on the progress he has been making, I feel very confident that he is going to be getting back to work sooner rather than later."

It was the first interview given by a Johnson family member since the senator was hospitalized Dec. 13 with stroke-like symptoms followed by brain surgery at George Washington University Medical Center in Washington.

At first, he says that might require someone driving his father to the Capitol and having some physical assistance until he gains his strength.

"But the encouraging thing from what we understand is that his mental functioning and his brain functioning -- so far, all the signs are that there is no reason to believe that he will have anything less than a full recovery," he said.

December 18, 2006

Science At Its Best & Worst

A team of neuroscientists and engineers from the University of California, Berkeley, and the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, get paid to launch undergraduates on a scent trail in an open field, blindfolded, ears blocked, on their knees, following a track of chocolate essential oil. The results show that we can apparently sniff out the world better than previously believed, at least in pursuit of chocolate.

”Our sense of smell is less keen partly because we put less demand on it," says lead author Jess Porter. "But if people practice sniffing smells, they can get really good at it."

So we’re more like dogs and rats than we know. But are they enough like us to make using them in medical research worthwhile? Check out this comparative analysis published at BMJ.com, a free open access online research journal. Researchers in Britain and Argentina conclude that at least half the animal studies they’ve examined are so flawed as to produce no data clinically relevant to human beings.

For a dose of science at its best, check out this new electric car design project inaugurated by a former BMW employee in Germany. Using the same cooperative open source movement that brought us the software Linux and the browser Firefox, Markus Merz, is asking anyone with a good idea to join the design team design for Oscar, named after the Open Source Car Project. Merz is hoping to attract designers and engineers to contribute ideas free of the restraints of secrecy, patents, or ownership. As reported by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation:

"The most effective tool you can have to get anything done is passion and creativity and that needs to be unleashed, and then it's much more powerful than money," says Lukas Neckerman, head of automotive business development at a financial services company in Munich.