"Dirty" Harry Reid

For all those who have said that Democrats don't have spines, Minority Leader Senator Harry Reid has them in spades. Maybe it is because he is from the West and the outlaw culture of Nevada, or maybe he just has the temerity to tell it like it is.

At last night's sold out J-J dinner for Utah Democratic Party, Reid was the guest of honor, and his job was to rally the troops into actualizing a believe that the West can be won. While he did that from what I am told, he also took the opportunity to note Senator Hatch's hypocrisy (but not in so many words). The Senatorial comment was "He's been a terribly big disappointment to me."

When he sat down with the Tribune Editorial board, Reid remarked "I can't imagine how Orrin Hatch can keep a straight face." He added, "I don't know how, within the framework of intellectual honesty, he can say the things he does." He can't Harry. This is the same guy who is whining about 10 stalled Bush appointees (out of 207 confirmed) when he blocked 69 of Clinton's (no Clinton sex jokes please).

Moreover, Hatch is the ultimate in cronyism. Take a look at the bench around this great state-- most are personally connected to Senator Hatch (who was at the time Judiciary Chairman): LDS Mission Companions, etc. In fact, the Tribune pointed out that "Hatch refused to sign off on any nominees until Clinton nominated Republican Ted Stewart, former Gov. Mike Leavitt's chief of staff." I don't recall Pat Lahey doing that to Bush do you? I am sure we would have heard about it if he insisted that Howard Dean's chief of staff be appointed to something for which he was utterly unqualified.

In response to Reid pointing out Hatch's obstructionist role Orrin told the paper that "I'm disappointed that he would allow the far left to influence him to distort the actual facts this way," Hatch said. "What is wrong with giving circuit court nominees a vote up and down? Instead the Democrats, led by Senator Reid, have said they will blow up the Senate and cause nuclear warfare. Those are the facts and no amount of Democratic rationalization or nasty comments can overcome them."

Yes, what is wrong with getting 69 nominees an up or down vote Senator Hatch? Personally, I am ever so gratified that Harry Reid is ratcheting up the rhetoric and playing the game so well. He makes Democrats look like gunslingers in the old westerns, or like Clint Eastwood's quasi-vigilante cop character in the 1970s.

The religious right's reward

Why stick with Bush if you are a conservative Christian (other than his purported fellowship of faith)? Many liberal thinkers have noted that religious conservatives supply the votes but rarely get much in return for their loyalty, while the pro-business end of the GOP make a good return on their investment of campaign contributions.

Now we see some of their first fruits of the second term of George W. Bush: the FDA is banning sperm donations from sexually active gay men.

Leland Traiman, director of a pro-gay sperm clinic in Alameda, California said "Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he's been celibate for five years."

To me this seems facially discriminatory. Sure statistically gay might be a higher risk of having a STD (including HIV) but statistically, men are more likely to violently kill people with guns, knives, etc. than women are (way more than homosexual men are to spread STDs compared to heterosexual men), yet no one in their right mind would attempt to ban the sale of such weapons to men (2nd amendment notwithstanding). You can find stats that certain racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientations are more likely to speed, steel, take/deal drugs, rape, molest children etc. but we don't create laws around these statistical realities.

We are a nation of laws and rights, not of probabilities and actuaries.

Would we allow acceptors of sperm get to ask for no gays, no blacks, no Jews, etc.? I have seen ads in my college newspaper requesting egg donors only from women whose SATs are high and who have 4 Jewish grandparents. This is a private-to-private transaction, however; I would imagine that if the eggs were stored in a facility that gets federal money, the result might come out differently.

This would have been a great law review write-on memo topic. Instead, I have read up/write on search and seizure for an imaginary hooker.

wide open spaces

the reason I haven't written in a awhile (and I apologize) is that I had my last couple finals crammed into this week. But now the first year of law school, which everyone hates, is over.

Most of my friends will be working somewhere in some fashion, and many in legal type jobs. Right now, I have a couple of Pro Bono activities lined up, and I am still waiting for the local public defenders office to get back to me. I doubt I will be hired, but I don't even know how I will make money this summer.

The season spreads out before me as a vast wasteland of time, filled with heat long days, and lots to do. My wedding-related chore list includes about 70 things, according to the fiancée.

Meanwhile, today I will pick up the packet to write on for Law Review. I doubt I will make it on, and I don't even know that I want to be on it with some of the characters on the staff. But it would be nice to be the first in my family to make law review, as unlikely as it would be.

Yesterday many of my friends from Lund's first year prospective class piled into cars and went down to Squatter's to celebrate our end of the year. Many of us wouldn't see each other under August again and all were left wondering what they would do with themselves now that they didn't have to memorize and study like crazy.

It was as if this year never happened. Sure, I can never watch TV or read anything the same way again, but I always felt I was a little odd in that department already. I mean, how many people you know get uncomfortable watching Everybody Loves Raymond or Seinfeld because they can't stand seeing the characters getting caught in embarrassing/awkward situations?

quote of the day

"Articles on April 25 and 26 about Pope Benedict XVI said that St. Peter was the founder of the Roman Catholic Church. According to the church, Jesus was the founder" -- Washington Post "Correction."

ethics wars: bring it on

After week after week of bad press for Tom DeLay caught with his hand in the cookie jar, someone leaked information that Democrats were on the take of Jack Abrabhof as well. Was it Jack? Was it DeLay's staff? Other angry GOPers in the know? Democrats who hate these congressmen? Or actual journalistic work? The last one seems the least likely. Jack paid for other people's illegal trips to Northern Mariana, those lovely sweat-shop islands

James E. Clyburn (S.C.), now vice chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, and Bennie Thompson (Miss.), now the senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee. The aides to DeLay were Edwin A. Buckham, now a lobbyist for the Alexander Strategy Group, and Tony Rudy, now a member of Buckham's lobbying firm.

All three congressmen when confronted with this claim they had no way of knowing that Abramoff's credit card was being used to pay for the trips. They believed that this was all being paid for by sham nonprofit groups, as House rules permit.

If this takes down Clyburn, the much overhyped kingmaker for the much overhyped SC presidential primary in 2004 (just ask John Edwards) and well as Bernie Thompson, both of whom are African-Americans from majority minority districts, then so be it. I have no stomach for these congressmen who have no actual competition and violate ethic rules right and left while not parting with their giant warchests or helping out in the battle to reclaim the House.

Who was against Campaign Finance Reform? Who wanted to eliminate the estate tax? The CBC, which has NO Republican members. I say good riddence. We need more CBC members like ex-Rep Denise Majette (GA) or Rep Artur Davis (D-AL). Both represent[ed] majority minority districts but did so in a way to appeal beyond their African-American base and allowed Majette to run a decent campaign for the Senate last year. She will be back too. With the state being reredistricted by the GOP, Majette will be running again to reclaim a seat. My vote is with her and against McKinney.

Where was Jim?

Roll Call announces that "Voting rights advocates will join" Government Reform Chair Tom Davis (R-VA) today "when he announces the reintroduction of his bill to create a full-fledged House seat" for DC.

According to Davis' office, DC Mayor Anthony Williams (D), DC Council Chair Linda Cropp (D), ex-Reps. Jack Kemp (R-NY) and Susan Molinari (R-NY), UT Reps. Chris Cannon (R) and Rob Bishop (R), and DC Shadow Rep. Ray Browne (D) will all be on hand for the announcement. DC Del Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) will be "absent from the proceedings."

And what about Jim Matheson (D-UT)? He is the one most likely to be affected by this bill. In the past he has been supportive of the idea that Utah should get another district. But which would he run in, the redone 2nd or the new 4th? If I remember correctly, the 4-seat redistrict plan by the UT leglisture had the 4th centered around Taylorsville, where Jim did quite well in 2000. It is very likely that Jim would jump into that seat, creating an open seat race for district that would be extremely difficult for any Utah Democrat to win besides Jim.

Of course, that's the point of the bill: one Democratic seat via DC, one GOP seat via UT. Davis doesn't really care about what the voters want or true representation for District residents, he just wants ensure no net gain for either party. This he believes makes it politically tenable to achieve.

Delagate Norton has applauded Davis' effort but she "remains committed to legislation she has sponsored that would provide both House and Senate representation" for DC, which in reality won't pass until there is a fillibuster-proof margin of Dems in the Senate and a majority of Democrats in the House.

Davis' idea is to temporarily expand the number of representives to 437, but what about just inflating it so that members represent reasonable numbers of people not 500,000 to 735,000 people (Utah is on that high end). Making the House fixed number means that states legislatures have to duke it out as to who/which party gets screwed in losing their seat(s).

ad of the day

NJ GOP meets South Park

Funny ad and super-low buget. Don't you dare call Republicans Candidians or Cubans.

conservatives as babies, bullies

Whenever conservatives don't get what they want, they complain. Nowadays they are so powerful that they try to bully too. Chris Mathews once called the GOP the "daddy party" while calling the Democrats the "mommy party." I think it is more like the GOP are the immature but violent teenager party while the Democrats are the know-it-all bookworm party. Guess who gets asked out to prom?

Today is another example. GOP has this imaginary fear of liberal media bias, while at the same time admitting they are not members of the reality-based community. That's why Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, GOP-appointed chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, is pushing to get rid of Bill Moyers' show. Sure Bill is a liberal but what about Wall Street Week, Washington Week, Fahreed Zakahri (sp?)'s new show, or Tucker Carlson's (that got moved to MSNBC for lack of $ for el bowtie)? All those shows are center-right. One liberal show that no one watches isn't really going to affect the outcome. Do you think if CNN gave Sean Penn a show that it would really affect news coverage or public perception? I can tell you I don't watch Bill's and I wouldn't watch Sean's. But I do like Moyer's the power of faith series and I would like him to stay on the air.

Mr. Tomlinson also encouraged corporation and public broadcasting officials to broadcast "The Journal Editorial Report," whose host, Paul Gigot, is editor of the conservative editorial page of The Wall Street Journal.

To me, that is going the other way and unnecessarily so.

We already have right-wing pundits on the taxpayer's dole to shill for Bush's aweful programs, do we need public-private ventures like PBS to pay for the right wing noise machine too? The vast majority (somewhere around 95%) of NPR/PBS money comes from private donors, either foundations or individuals, and not your tax dollars.

I for one am tired of the GOP trying to scare the media into softball coverage of this president and this congress via threats to their pocketbooks, their ability to cover the president and GOPers (even to get access), and questioning their objectivity. The media now provide "both sides of the story" that is, what operatives from both extremes want them to say. Nevermind the objective truth, the lies behind the rhetoric or any possibility of distortions or general dishonesty.

Calling Orrin on lies

I thought someone as supposidly pious as Senator Hatch shouldn't be lying so obviously. But thank goodness for Robert Gehrke, who points it out.

[Hatch is leading the charge against Senate Democrats' blockage of 7 of 200+ Bush judicial nominees]But during the Utah Republican's tenure as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, dozens of President Clinton's nominees never received an up-or-down vote, because their nominations were suffocated by procedural traps, a Tribune analysis of congressional records shows. Others were mired in the committee for years before being confirmed by the Senate.

Somehow, Hatch gets angry when people point out the blatant hypocrisy of saying a 41-person fillibuster is less democratic than his 1 or 2 person "blue slipping" of judicial nominees.

"That's all B.S. and they know it," Hatch insists. "I don't think anybody can say I didn't do my best." Your best to block Clinton's nominees that is. Plus, I can't believe you said B.S. I wonder how much he swears off the record, like when a take of his latest cheesey CD is bad.

Honestly, both parties are pretty childish about judicial nominees and it seems like there should be a better way to nominate and confirm than this tit-for-tat technique. Unfortunately, the constitution doesn't say the president has to nominate reasonable or broadly favorable judges, just that the Senate must "advise and consent" to the judge's confirmation. Maybe there should be a bipartisan panel that advises the president on what nominees would be good per se and have a good chance of support from 60 senators. Of course, the President could ignore those suggestions, but would do so at his/her own peril. Why don't they make a subcommittee of the judicary that is equally weighted and could give their advise to the president.

Facially, it seems like this would be constitutional and the subcomittee report could be placed for a vote before the whole Senate (and subject to a fillabuster) so that every egomaniac that is in the club of 100 wouldn't feel snubbed. But of course, that would take some cajones from the party in power to give a little bit up in the name of the country to fill out the judiciary with good judges who are not extremists from either side. And I for one am not going to hold my breath on that one.

Bush's 2nd=FDR's 2nd

I have been watching in my spare time a History Channel documentary on FDR (this is how I was raised, it is engrained) and right now the story is set at FDR's second term 1936-40. It is his darkest hour; dispite winning big majorities in the House and Senate, all of his key legislation is being overturned by the activist and reactionary Supreme Court.

Like Bush, he storms the country trying to convince the people that his bad idea is a good one. For FDR it was his court packing plan (having a new justice for every justice over 70), for Bush it is ironically trying to overturn FDR's greatest domestic legacy: Social Security. Both we in denial even while poll after poll showed that the public and the Congress thought it was a bad idea. FDR even tried to campaign in primaries against those in his party who voted against him: he went 1-20 and nearly lost his reelection, going from 60% in 1936 (or there abouts) to 52% in 1940. The only way Franklin won was by basically lying and appealing to the isolationists of America and looking the other way on Southern Racism while his wife campaigned against lynching.

Laura Bush hasn't done anything as noble, but people approve of her by about 80% while her husband is only around 48%. The only thing keeping him afloat is the war on terrorism, which in reality is going very poorly. The one legal success was because they wore down a man who had nothing to do with 9/11 so he confessed to committing something he wished he had done. The rest of the legal cases have been unmitagated disasters. Terrorist attacks have trippled since last year, which was a previous record high. Iraq is still a big giant mess.

FDR inherited a depression and tried stuff but his plans didn't work. Bush enhirited a bubble and proceeded to ride it all the way into the ground, like that guy on Dr. Strangelove. Thank goodness for Bush he cannot to run for a 3rd term like FDR could; watching Bush try for a 3rd term would be like watching a train wreck.

2006 Senate Outlook

MD:

Well the you know what just hit the fan for Mfume. The ex-head of the NCAAP (whom I praised for his performance on Hardball) has got some enemies in the old organization. Memos were leaked that said Mfume "gave raises and promotions to women with whom he had close personal relationships." How close are we talking? Chicago Attorney Marcia Goodman wrote that Mfume's actions gave "the impression [that was] created that a woman must provide sexual favors to Mr. Mfume or his associates in order to receive favorable treatment in the workplace." The memo went on to assess the chance and success of a lawsuit against the NAACP, which would have been "highly damaging"...I hope they didn't pay her too much for that last part of her memo.

Mfume responded: "[T]here is not nor has there been any situation where female employees have been 'pitted against one another' to obtain raises or promotions." Of course, he did date a women at NAACP for 3 months and adopted the then 4-year son of one of them (who is now 15). I say, let the women in question raise these complaints, not some shaddowy person who is miffed at Mfumi's leadership. Still, I have gone neutral now in this race pending further review.

Oh and Mfume hired Joe Trippi, hoping for that HoHo magic.

AZ:

Yesterday, MoveOn.org sponsored a rally in Phoenix, where ex-state Sen. Slade Mead (R) joined AZ Dem chair Jim Pederson in a "protest" of GOP threats to win confirmation for federal judges by changing U.S. Senate rules.

In turn, Pederson gave props to Sen. John McCain (R) for opposing the rules change. Pederson: "It is not a partisan issue, it's about our rights, about keeping extreme judges out of the judicial system. It's about a president not running roughshod over this country."

Many "demonstrators" displayed signs attacking Sen. Jon Kyl (R), who heads the GOP policy committee that is pushing for the rule change and just so happens to be up for re-election. (Wouldn't you know)... On wonders who the Democrats are going to put up against him, somehow I doubt it is Peterson, but who knows.

NE

The same guy that barely lost to Benator last time is challenging him again. ex NE AG Stenberg lost to Nelson in '00 by 15K votes, but then again that was the closest margin since NE began directly electing senators by popular vote (1906 people)and that the GOP voter registration advantage over Dems has grown by 34K since '00.

Still he is a sitting senator. But at least Nelson isn't running against that old Nebraska coach. His endorsement is like an automatic win. Just ask Goveror Bob Henry.

PA

Pennacchio, a MyDD-wing internet daring said he heard from what he characterized as 5 or 6 "party-established figures" who asked him to reconsider running. Pennacchio: "They told me I had no right to run. They told me the campaign was going to drive me into debt or break up my family. They told me I'm going to lose badly; that I'd be humiliated and I'd have no political future. ... I think that indicates the threat we pose in their minds." What kind of a threat, I don't know but it could make for an ugly primary.

But don't call Pennacchio "liberal," he prefers "progressive" to describe himself. Labels all of them. "He focuses on two issues, abortion and gun control, to draw contrasts between himself and Casey."

VT

The signs point to Vermont GOP governor Jim Douglas not to run against Bernie "Socialist" Sanders (I). VT GOP chair Jim Barnett changes the subject whenever he is asked about Douglas' thoughts on running for Senate.

WA

Wow, I thought for sure that ex-St. Sen. Dino Rossi would use his painfully close loss for the Governorship as a launching pad to the Senate. "I have four small children and I'm not sure how I'd make it work with the family without upheaval and difficulty for the kids. So, that really is not my focus. My focus is running for governor and being governor of the state of Washington and turning the state around. So I'm not running for the U.S. Senate. I'm running for governor." OK well at least he was honest and not one of those undisclosed "personal reasons."

The national GOP are hoping he would reconsider since Maria Cantwell barely beat ex-Sen. Slade Gordon in 2000 and now all her Real Networks money is gone. Rossi: "I can't see a scenario where it would pan out for me against Cantwell. The polling says I'd beat her, but I don't need a political career" To me, that is slamming the door on the NRSCC.

WV

With MoveOn.org giving a quick cash infusion to the old and disgruntled Senate Historian and Senior Citizen, this looks like a cake walk. I really wish Rep. Shelley Moore Capito would get into the race even if Byrd can't handle an actual race.

That way, Democrats could finally reclaim that House seat. But alas, Bryd is staying there until he dies.

RI

Sheldon Whitehouse is trying to raise money and be important. Chaffee's would be primary competition was admonished by the state ethics board to stop his AM radio show since it was basically a free political ad. To me, it still looks like Chaffee pulls this one out by his teeth. Unless he really screws up with Bolton and Bush drops further. Word of advice: Lincoln, make sure you are the last GOPer to vote.

NY

Hillary's coasting and the state Republican party is in a mess. They can't find anyone to challenge Hillary and not anyone who can be on the conservative party ticket as well as the GOP ticket for governor (Weld is too liberal for them). Guilani is too worried about running for President and Pataki has outworn his welcome.

If I were the NYGOP, I would get Bloomberg to run for Governor or against Hillary.

OVERALL

Things are generally looking up for Democrats, but they still need to get their act together in RI and PA to make sure they can add two more seats to the collumn. And after that, they still need 3-4 more.

playing chicken and winning

Loyal Readers know my previous distaste with Congressional Democrats, but lately they seem to have gotten their act together.

First it seemed to be all my adopted Senator Harry Reid (hey Nevada's close enough)'s doing, foiling Bush's second term agenda on fillibusters and Social Security. So far, even Dirty Harry's gamble on a "compromise" to the fillibuster seems to have paid off.

Now, House Democrats are coming through. Having said no dice to a "compromise" by GOP on having an Ethics Committee investigation on Tom DeLay, Hastert and Company have retreated into following the premise of Democrats' complaints: that the rule changes would have made an investigation toothless and pre-ordained quasi-acquittal of DeLay. Now they are offering to change back to the old rules. Fortunately for them, they kicked off all the GOPers that decided to admonish DeLay last time with ones who took his PAC money.


My caption: "Say goodbye political career" DeLay and Bush "Goodbye political career!"

What's yours?

who needs whom?

I read the other day that Bush was going to show his support for ethically-challenged House Majority Leader Tom DeLay by giving him a free ride on Air Force One to Texas. That way, the Bugman won't have to hitch a ride from some lobbyist or corporation that he won't report or payback. Of course, the rest of use these things called commercial airlines, but never mind.

But the real question here is, why is Bush doing this, and why is DeLay accepting it? With a 48% approval ratting (with negatives in every major category except terrorism at 56%) Bush isn't quite the guy you want to associate yourself with if you are in a more moderate district where you only won in Texas by 5 points to some unknown guy supported by Howard Dean and liberal bloggers. On Bush's side, you are freely associating yourself with a guy that is a more blunt version of the criticisms against you-- a corporate/religious right shill who panders to both for money and power-- only he has gotten caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Does Bush really need Tom DeLay's support and power among House Republicans that badly to pass his Social Security Privatization Plan? If so, he is in way worse shape than I thought since most House Republicans are basically GOP robots. Plus, the rules are stacked in the President's favor in the House and against him in the Senate. Bush extended his fake town hall meeting tour despite its resounding failure. Have the wheels finally come off the wagon over there at 1600 Penn. Ave?

As for DeLay, I guess Bush is still more popular down in his "home" state of Texas than elsewhere and even in this swingable district. Plus, maybe he is just plain old desperate since donations to DeLay's legal defense fund have fallen sharply in the last three months.

Records filed 4/25 showed DeLay raised $48K in the first quarter of 2005 compared to $254K in the first quarter of last year. One constant: donations from his fellow House GOPers. House GOPers gave $30K in Q1. The "largest donor" was Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) and his PAC, "each donating the maximum" of $5K according to the Austin American-Statesman.

Meanwhile the DCCC strong-armed last year's 45% "nobody" challenger to DeLay (Richard Morrison) out of the race and place in 100-mi carpetbagger ex-Rep. Nick Lampoon (no Chevy Chase jokes please). True to form, Roll Call says Lampson "will hold his first fundraiser" in DC on Thursday. On the other end of the political spectrum, Republican Michael Fjetland has challenged DeLay in two of the three primaries but unlike before, Fox News reports that "some Republicans are now urging him to run."

Meanwhile, the GOP in New York are so desperate they are asking ex-Massachusetts Governor (who lost a Senate Bid to Kerry in 1996) William Weld to run for Governor of their state. And it sounds like Weld is warming to the idea "Eliot [Spitzer, NY AG and Democratic Candidate for Governor]'s making his name the same way I made mine, and he would be tough to beat. But I think I could beat him, yes, it's possible."

In other Texas news, Country Musician/Author/Comedian/TX Governor candidate Kinky Friedman (I) "plans to team with" ex-MN Gov. Jesse Ventura (I) manager/ex-MN Sen. Dean Barkley (I). We might have two firsts, a governor of two states, and an ex-senator running a governor’s race. Any political trivia experts know if either has been done before?

undue influence

USATODAY did an actual investigative news story, I can't believe it!

Hundreds of police officers nationwide also are on payrolls of companies that supply weapons, riot gear and other equipment to the officers' departments, creating possible conflicts of interest.
The arrangements have involved officers who advise their departments on what equipment to buy, according to a survey of at least a half-dozen companies by USA TODAY.

OK, so all they did was ask companies like Taser, Armor Holdings (they make bullet-resistant clothing), ASP (a police baton manufacturer); and PepperBall Technologies (guess what they make? pepper-spray repellent duh), the companies admitted they pay officers to train other police to use the companies' products.

Such arrangements between equipment providers and police have generated no formal allegations of wrongdoing. Taser International President Tom Smith says police are paid about $600 plus travel expenses to oversee a two-day training session on their days off.
"We bring in officers for their expertise," he says. "You don't have nurses train pilots."

Right, but you could use RETIRED pilots to train pilots, and boeing does not pay the same pilots who buy the company's planes (I don't think any pilots do anyway) to train other pilots. Just because everyone's doing it, does not justify it.

Taser in particular has come under attack from Amnesty International and the Arizona Republic, who discovered that more than 80 people have died after being shocked by Tasers. Smith and Weson doesn't employ active duty police who buy the guns, why can't these companies do the same?

Details, details

Today is "Justice Sunday," where the American Taliban do a group victimization rally at a mega-church in Kentucky to whine about getting only 95% of Bush's appointees confirmed to lifetime spots on the federal judiciary. Is it just me, or are members of the Republican Leadership just spoiled brats? It seems like they are always throwing hissy fits when they don't what they want, blaming things on the SCLM, Senate Democrats, RINOs, any one but themselves.

Meanwhile, in the reddest state in the union, Daren Jensen was running for GOP vice chair of SL county ran into a minor snafu that destroyed his candidacy: he's not a registered Republican (just plain conservative I guess). He thought he checked the box last time he voted, but alas it was never recorded. Meanwhile, registered GOPers at the top knew of the error and didn't let him know of his mistake until was too late so they could just disqualify him.

He has pushed for legislation to overhaul the Division of Child and Family Services and the Guardian Ad Litem's Office, two state agencies involved in the high-profile push to force his then-12-year-old son, Parker, into chemotherapy in 2003."I don't need an office or a vice chairmanship to continue to represent people of like values," he said.

Daren Jensen refused to treat his son's leukemia with chemo and thus attracted the ire of the GAL office and a debate about the role of government. Actually, it does sound like Jensen is more Libertarian than GOP. The GOP nowadays would love to legislate how you raise your children, how you get your jollies, what you see on TV/Movies/Internet, how you end your life, etc. The GOP is trying to legislate their American Taliban brand of morality (another thing that makes these extremists akin to their Islamic counterparts in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan).

Personally, and I think most people would agree with me, I think Mr. Jensen doesn't have the right to decide the fate of his son like that. Chemo is a crude method of treating cancer, but until we develop more advanced treatments, it is sometimes the only treatment option. If Parker was 18+ and said he didn't want treatment, I would respect his wishes, but since he was 12, he can't really give consent and when parents make choices on behalf of their children that harm their life expectancy, the state should properly intrude.

Parker is now 13, and apparently cancer free, thank God. His father's legislation would force state agencies like GAL to take children like Parker's wishes into account when making these decisions. If Parker, just prior to going on to life support, had told his parents and state social workers that he didn't want to prolong his life, then I would be down with that per Crusan. Not all kids are really capable of making the right choice as Parker was when it comes to something less drastic than the life-support scenario; that is, how do you define who is a "mature-minor?"

Jensen's bills: Senate Bill 83 provides that a parent's medical decision does not constitute neglect unless the state can prove by "clear and convincing" evidence that the decision was not "reasonable or informed." House Bill 202 narrows the definition of child abuse, excluding threatened physical harm and upping mental harm to mental cruelty and neglect to chronic neglect. To get it past committee, sponsor Wayne Harper, R-West Jordan, discarded even more controversial provisions. House Bill 338 seeks to limit the role of the Guardian ad Litem, a division of attorneys appointed to represent the best interests of children in juvenile court.

SB 83 passed both houses of the legislature and Governor Huntsman is expected to sign the bill into law. The others failed in the Senate I believe. At the very least, Daren Jensen ended the career of at least one state official: GAL head Alicia Davis stepped down in February after it was revealed that the office doesn't usually meet with the children to discuss their wishes and that all but $75,000 of her office's $239,000 budget went to cover the salaries of Davis and her assistant.

Details, details

American Taliban Study Article III

I am sure most of my readers have heard how Sen. Frist is planning on appearing via video at the fringe religious right meeting Sunday that is accusing Democrats and Reagan appointee Justice Kennedy as being "Against people of faith." And you probably have heard that the Senate Majority Leader who can't wait to step down to run for president is being admonished by leaders of his own faith-- Presbyterianism-- for linking arms with the American Taliban. That is, those religious leaders who want to rid our country of judges who don't look to the bible when deciding cases.

But what you might not know is that they are calling on Frist to eliminate the 9th circuit (I assume they mean the court of appeals and not the entire circuit, but who knows) and/or strip funding for any non-Christian fundamentalist federal judges. Family Research Council founder James C. Dobson explained his Article III scholarship thusly "Very few people know this, that the Congress can simply disenfranchise a court," Dobson said. "They don't have to fire anybody or impeach them or go through that battle. All they have to do is say the 9th Circuit doesn't exist anymore, and it's gone." Tony Perkins, also of FRC, chimed in noting "There's more than one way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to take a black robe off the bench," Perkins added What they're thinking of is not only the fact of just making these courts go away and re-creating them the next day but also defunding them." House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, the ethically challenged insect exterminator, is pointing his spray at the Judiciary as well. "We set up the courts. We can unset the courts. We have the power of the purse."

The Ninth Circuit does some wacky things and is probably the most overturned circuit out there, but they also have about twice the caseload any other circuit. Getting rid of their funding, or worse yet, getting rid of the circuit all together, would be a disaster. I am down with splitting the circuit, like they did for the 4th and 11th, which would allow Bush even to appoint more judges but reduce the case load of the 9th [my plan would be to split it North-South, with SoCal staying with Arizona et al and Northern Cal staying with Alaska and Idaho and co.]

If getting rid of the filibuster for judicial appointees is the "Nuclear Option," then getting rid of the district and appellate courts is the "Nuclear Winter Option."© [Third Avenue, 2005] Now their plan would be to eliminate the lower courts one day, and the next recreate it so that Bush could replace the entire bench, of say the 9th circuit. But why should the power hungry stop there, why not the entire judiciary save the Supreme Court, which was created by the Constitution, not by the Judiciary Act of 1792?

This possibility, while remote due, scared me enough during Civil Procedure last semester to repeatedly ask my professor if it really was theoretically possible. He said yes, but doubted anyone would have the political power to do such a thing, comparing it to FDR's court packing scheme after winning reelection in 1936.

I almost think this is worse than adding 6 new justices. The vast majority of cases in the Federal system are decided at the district court level, and most of the rest are decided by the appealate courts. Only a tiny number of cases are even heard by the US Supreme Court's writ of Certiorari and limited Jurisdiction. The basic idea behind the Family Research Council's plan has been tried before by Jessie Helms, who tried to strip the federal court's jurisdiction from hearing school busing/desegregation claims, school prayer cases, flag burning, and pledge of allegiance cases. All failed to pass the Senate.

Such neutering of the judiciary would make it possible for Congress or the states to pass an unconstitutional law but give injured parties virtually no avenue to vindicate their claims. Sure, state courts could hear some of the claims but their decisions are not binding on other states or the federal government’s actions.

Even think they doubt that they will succeed in completing the Nuclear Winter Option. All this is really just a base rally, a warm up for the real battle royal this summer: replacing Chief Justice Rehnquist [and possibly naming a CJ out of the current court, a.k.a Scalia or Thomas]. "Folks, I am telling you all that it is going to be the mother of all battles," Dobson predicted at the March 17 meeting. "And it's right around the corner. I mean, Justice Rehnquist could resign at any time, and the other side is mobilized to the teeth." They don't just want a anti-Roe judge or a generally conservative judge like Scalia. They want a 19th century justice who will look at every case asking not WWJD, but WWFRCD [what would the Family Research Council Do?] and reinstate the "Constitution in Exile."

What they don't realize is that if all this were explained to Americans, the vast majority of them would not go along with Dobson's plan or appointees. People love Social Security and the New Deal reforms that brought about government oversight, civil rights, workers rights, and environmental protection. These guys basically advocating to build a way back machine that would magically transport us to 1937, or even further back to when judicial opinions cited King James [version of Bible] more than James Madison to justify their actions.

Kwame Mfume for Senate

...you know, I had my doubts before, but after watching him on Hardball talk about John Bolton versus David Drier (that scumball who's days in the House are numbered), he sounded Senatorial to me. And I mean that in the good sense, not the John Kerry can't speak English sense.

While Drier ranted and raved, Mfume calmly explained why it would be a bad idea to have the crazy mustash man run an organization he A) doesn't believe exists B) doesn't think should exist and C) has no respect for diplomacy--whether between countries or even in his own department. Drier tried to make the point that tons of members of congress have bad tempers; true, but they haven't been nominated to be DIPLOMATS.

Chris Mathews channeled his saner self by saying the fudging intelligence questions about Bolton troubled him the most. When Mfume pointed out that it was the same Modus Operendi for justifying the War in Iraq, Mathews went ape because he was part of the media "conspiracy" to support the war.

I only caught like the last 10 minutes or whatever, but the former head of the NAACP/ex-Rep. did an excellant job in my view considering he had two hostle, attention demanding personalities to contend with on the show. If he wins the primary and general, he will have to face about 99 more of these types of egomaniacs in the Senate, so this was a good test to see if he has what it takes. And in my view, he passed with flying colors. Read the transcripts when they come out, you will see what I mean.

2012 preview

As you can see here, state's like Utah, New Mexico and Arizona and growing fast. So if these trends hold up, it looks like all the states marked in blue will get at least two new seats, orange 1 to 2, and red maybe 1. The rest will be losing seats, especially negative growth places like West Virginia. I bet Massachusetts will lose one as well. But neighboring New Hampshire will actually gain one.

politicians will say the darnest things

In other news, SC state judiciary committee voted to ban cockfighting, yet voted down a measure that would increase the penalty for domestic violence to a felony. A female reporter asked a committee member why he voted that way, wondering why protecting the rights of chickens against was more important than those of women. On camera, Rep. John Graham Altman (R) said that it was a stupid question and that the two were not comparable (and that the questioner wasn't too bright either). Altman went on to wonder how dumb these women must be who return to their abuse partner. I guess he has never heard of physiology, let alone battered women's syndrome.

As a result of his foot-in-mouth disease, 00 college students, mostly from Columbia College, marched to the State House to blast him and his fellow sexists.


As the story went national, he offered a non-apology apology telling the State “I’m very sorry the politically correct crowd is using this as some kind of cannon fodder. I’m being charged with the greatest crime of all-- insensitivity.” No, I think the crime you are being accused of is blaming the victim and caring more about your cock (male chicken) than your female constituents.

If I had a twin...

"I'd have him go to work/school for me and take notes while I sleep in" this is every kid's fantasy that involves either identical twins or clones, which are the artifical version.

Well, finally, a politican tried this stunt (and got caught). Julian Castro (D?), who is running for Mayor of San Antonio, and his twin brother Joaquin, who is not, got caught doing the old switcheroo on unsuspecting river walk city council parade watchers. [Julian claims he was planning to go WITH his brother but had to cancel last minute and his brother chose to still go; Julian had a meeting on the other side of the city. The brothers blame the mix up on the parade/float announcer.]

To make up for this embaressing turn of events, the brothers Castro had a great gag press conversence to clear up the mess: T-shirts so people know who is who. [ActiveX Required]



As funny as this sounds, maybe this was a good idea. I mean if nobody knows you are running for mayor, what better way to get free publicity than to stage a twin stunt? Of course, it shows a lack of character and willingness to cheat/lie/cut corners that most voters find distasteful. But to quote Madonna (whom I am sure stole it from someone else): "There's no such thing as bad publicity"

I am not saying that Castro is a marginal candidate, in fact in the above video clip, the city councilman claims his rivals are using this incident to distract from the real issues and try to close the huge lead Castro has. And SurveyUSA backs him up on that: Julian is leading 43-28-22-7 (3-way race with seven percent undecided and a 4.8 MoE 443 likely voters called 4/11-13). Now if only the Coors light twins would run...then everyone would follow the story.

Hypocrisy for America

So I am sure have all read this gem that Tom DeLay said in the well of the House in 1995, but I just can’t resist before moving on to other items of my morning roundup.

"The time has come that the American people know exactly what their Representatives are doing here in Washington. Are they feeding at the public trough, taking lobbyist-paid vacations, getting wined and dined by special interest groups? Or are they working hard to represent their constituents? The people, the American people, have a right to know...I say the best disinfectant is full disclosure, not isolation."

Now moving on other highlights: the Bush Administration is not calling DeLay a social friend but he’s a friend of the President nonetheless; watch the Daily Show for the color-coded chart.

According to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's campaign committee, whose surplus is invested in the stock market, has lost more than $16K in the stock market in the 1st Quarter. And this isn’t the only time his campaign funds have lost money in the stock market either. Now can you imagine your social security money being invested the same way? Because we know whomever is investing Frist’s campaign money would be the same people who would manage our Social Security money in a Bush or GOP 2008 Administration.

Speaking of 2008, the President’s brother Jeb (and the would-be front runner for the GOP nomination) lost in his bid to get rid of one of the Florida Democratic Party’s raising stars: Buddy Dryer continues to be Mayor of GOP-leaning Orlando, despite a Bush-appointees investigation and charges of campaign law violation that threatened to remove the popular mayor. The crime? His campaign paid black people to get their fellow African-Americans to vote by accepting absentee ballots in 2002. The election law on this point is ambiguous if such actions are even a crime.

Remember the Caging List of FL African-Americans the GOP targeted to disenfranchise in 2004? Guess where most of them lived. Anyway, the special prosecutor told the Oralando Sentinel that he was dropping all the charges against Mayor Buddy (not Providence’s Mayor Buddy, who might be back front his second round in jail).

Meanwhile Senator Lincoln Chaffee twists in the wind on Bolton, hoping either to get more money from Frist or find a way out of this Catch-22 for a Blue State GOP Senator up for re-election. "I think it would be accurate to say I'm on the fence" he told the Projo.

Governor Arnold blamed his ESL skills after getting caught sounding anti-immigrant in California, a big no-no. Here’s the original quote: "Close the borders in California and all across Mexico and in the United States," Schwarzenegger said Tuesday. "Because I think it is just unfair to have all those people coming across, have the borders open the way it is, and have this kind of lax situation." After a couple attempts at spinning by his press people, Arnold tried to claim that the mistake was a language barrier. "I meant 'securing' our borders, not 'closing' them.” He said, going on to joke that he needed to take some more English classes, if only George W. Bush were so lucky to have this excuse in his pocket.

California Democrats’ BS detector went off like crazy. "The governor knows what he's saying. He knows what his words mean,'' state Treasurer Phil Angelides told the SF Cronie (he’s running against Arnie in 2006). "The visual image of closing the border is a clear image ... and it's not the first time he's done this,'' pointing out how Schwazenegger condemned the San Francisco gay marriages in 2003 to a GOP crowd, only to backtrack later when needing to seem more moderate claiming he asked the AG to halt the marriages because "we see riots, we see protests, we see people clashing.'' The anti-politician is actually just a typical one, playing to the base and middle at the same time, and trying not to seem to Janus-faced about it.