McCain-Gate
This is a John le Carré story brought to the screen by Mel Brooks, along the lines of Tinker, Tailor, Sailor, Schmuck.
As a former Naval officer who was tortured while being held as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, John McCain opposes any American use of torture. To ensure that all questionable practices are stopped he has added an amendment to an appropriations bill which received 90% support in the Senate.
In a reflexive reaction to anything that looks like Congressional oversight, the White House has threaten to veto the bill and Cheney has tried to get an exemption for the CIA to torture people even though Bush says we aren’t doing it and have never authorized anyone to do it.
Cheney comes down and has a chat with Republicans Senators to convince them that they must exempt the CIA to permit them to use the methods that we aren’t using.
This meeting is followed by an article in The Washington Post about the existence of secret prisons in Eastern European countries, countries like Poland and Romania, where methods we are reassured are not being used might have occurred.
[At this point there is a break during which Moe hits Larry on the head with a hammer after Curly dumped the can of paint on Moe’s head when he is startled by Harpo’s horn.]
Having slept for two years and showing no interest in how wars might have started, the dynamic duo of “Dennis the Demented” Hastert and “Barney” Frist leap into action, demanding an immediate joint investigation of the leak to The Washington Post, but Trent Lott slides up to a microphone, arches his eyebrows several times, removes his cigar and says it was a Republican in the conference room with a Cheney. Pandemonium ensues until the janitor waddles on to the stage in his derby and sweeps up the rubber chickens and feathers.
On a serious note, Atrios wonders if John McCain was lying in an interview on this matter. McCain is a former Naval officer and knows the rules on classified information: even if it is reported in open sources you do not confirm or deny classified information. McCain knows he has made himself a target by his amendment, and doesn’t intend to give them a bigger target.
I would hazard a guess that someone thought that McCain talked to the Post and emerged from his burrow long enough to scare Lou and Bud, excuse me, Hastert and Frist to launch the investigation.
[credits: Clif, John McKay, Jack K., and Laura Rosen]
November 9, 2005 Comments Off on McCain-Gate
Kansas Fires Up The Time Machine
While a Dover, Pennsylvania school board waits to find out how badly they are going to lose their case [having lost their jobs in yesterday’s election], the Kansas state school board redefines science to permit the teaching of
If these people think they are racking up points with the “Big Guy” by their efforts, they might want to review the “Big Ten”. I would direct their attention specifically to the item about false witness.
As I try not to be totally negative, I will say that this change will be of benefit to students of the bio-sciences in other states vying for positions at universities and medical schools, having all of the competition from Kansas eliminated.
When Thomas Frank tried to explain What’s the Matter with Kansas?, he neglected to mention they were waiting for the return of Zardoz.
November 9, 2005 Comments Off on Kansas Fires Up The Time Machine
One-liners
November 9, 2005 Comments Off on One-liners
Texas Outlaws Marriage
Below is the text of the resolution that was placed on the ballot in the state of Texas yesterday:
H.J.R. No. 6
A JOINT RESOLUTION proposing a constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Article I, Texas Constitution, is amended by adding Section 32 to read as follows:
Sec. 32. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.SECTION 2. This state recognizes that through the designation of guardians, the appointment of agents, and the use of private contracts, persons may adequately and properly appoint guardians and arrange rights relating to hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies without the existence of any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
SECTION 3. This proposed constitutional amendment shall be submitted to the voters at an election to be held November 8, 2005. The ballot shall be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition: “The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”
As is the case with many laws, first terms are defined, then they are used. As “marriage” is defined as the “union of one man and one woman” the only arrangement that can be “identical … to marriage” is the “union of one man and one woman”, and “[t]his state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status” for it.
This was pointed out to the proponents, but they rejected the logic. I don’t see how a judge can reject the logic, as it is the plain meaning of the text. A judge can only go so far with the “intent” of the drafters before he/she begins “legislating from the bench”, and this was an amendment to the state constitution.
“Section 2” in this bill makes it plain that those who wrote it don’t think that “marriage” is actually required, as there are existing contractual provisions that cover all of the “rights” associated with “marriage”.
Anyone who thinks divorce lawyers won’t be all over this are as ignorant as the people who wrote it, and those who voted for it.
Jack at The People’s Republic of Seabrook arrives at the same conclusion as to the effect of this measure.
November 9, 2005 Comments Off on Texas Outlaws Marriage
France
I have avoided writing about this, although I was aware of it from the first night because I read foreign news services.
The initial report was that this was a reaction to the death of two juveniles who had reportedly fled the police and hid in an electric substation. The boys were apparently accidentally electrocuted, but I couldn’t swear to that because there has been no clear information as to what actually happened. You don’t know if the boys were fleeing a crime scene, merely being chased as suspicious, or simply wandered into the station. You don’t know for certain that they were electrocuted, although that seems to be implied.
Initial reports all talked about “Muslim immigrants”, but the French officials talk about third generation “dark” people as “immigrants” while Northern European immigrants are never labeled that way. The bulk of those involved are the children and grandchildren of immigrants. They were born in France and educated in France. Most cannot speak any language except French and are not notably religious, as evinced by the lack of reaction to fatwas issued by prominent French imams to stop the demonstrations.
I have learned that the burning of cars has increased, but it has been a feature of weekends in many of these areas for a very long time. I would have thought that someone should have taken some action about cars being burned every weekend before now, but the French reaction has been to reduce the local police presence in many of these areas.
It took several days for the story about police officers being shot by rioters to be resolved as an attack by BB guns, not Uzis. Coke bottles of gasoline and cobblestones are a good deal more dangerous to my mind.
What you have in the end are the Watts riots. French citizens of a darker shade of skin color have discovered that, stated guarantees notwithstanding, if you are not of a pale complexion, you are not likely to find stable full-time employment. Without a full-time job you have only limited access to the benefits of the society.
The conservative government of France really kept this going when the Minister of the Interior decided to call the people involved “scum” and other epithets. That minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, is a part of the problem. The grandchildren of immigrants are really annoyed by the child of immigrants telling them that they are not French. Mr. Sarkozy is the child of a Hungarian immigrant father and a Greek mother. The fact that he is now the Interior Minister while they are still stuck in ugly, concrete housing blocks is proof to many of the discrimination.
Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin has promised new programs for development in the affected areas, the same promises that are made every decade or so in France, but nothing really changes. He also announced curfews under a law passed as an attempt to control the uprisings in Algeria in the mid-1950s. The people in the communities have noticed the connection.
The French government is right when it says the problem is that these people haven’t assimilated into French society, they haven’t. However, the root of the problem is that French society has refused to allow them to assimilate.
November 9, 2005 Comments Off on France
