Good old yeller journalism

Big media outlets are still failing to address what many suggest could be “the Pentagon Papers of our time.” TV and print media have downplayed the memo, insisting that it contains “nothing new.” They’ve tried to justify their lack of critical attention by saying it was “conventional wisdom” that Bush wanted to invade Iraq. But as FAIR points out, if Americans knew the administration’s ultimate goal was to attack, regardless of intelligence,

- Why would Bush have lied and said war was a last resort?
- Why would the White House have needed to justify invasion by misleading Americans (as they still do) into believing that Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda?
-Why did the media have to selectively report information on the existence of WMD?

If administration plans were “conventional wisdom” outside the beltway, why would polls have shown a bamboozled American public—the majority of whom were in no hurry to go into Iraq—who were confused over the reasons for going to war even more than a year into the occupation? How is solid evidence of a rush to invade, without adequate intelligence or an exit strategy, not shocking and newsworthy?

While many news outlets have brushed off the Downing Street Memo and the hearing held in Washington to discuss issues brought up by the memo, others have offered gross misrepresentations. Even that bastion of the “liberal media,” The New York Times, dismissed those who attended the meeting—including distinguished members of Congress, prominent lawyers, diplomats, and families of victims—as less than credible “antiwar activists.”

But some of the most irresponsible and spiteful coverage of the “Downing Street Memo” and the Democrats’ hearing has come from the Washington Post. Dana Milbank’s June 17 editorial, 'Democrats Play House to Rally Against the War,' distorted facts and mocked democrats for “taking a trip to the land of make believe,” belittling their legitimate inquiry into Bush’s reasons for risking the lives of soldiers and civilians as “antiwar theatrics.”

Conyers responded with a letter to the Post, slamming Milbank’s false claims and derisive tone. The Congressman refuted the notion that the memo has been unimportant to Democrats in Congress, pointing out that at least four representatives—including the minority leader—have brought the memo to the floor, and more than one hundred have signed Conyers’ letter to the president. If more Democrats were unable to further show their support at the hearing, Conyers said, it was likely because Republicans scheduled an unheard of 11 consecutive floor votes during the forum and refused to grant Democrats anything more than a small room in the basement of the Capitol for the meeting.

Watch for a CodePink media alert on this...

Hope?

The Nation sees light at the end of the tunnel--"This really can be the beginning of the end of a disastrous war and a bankrupt national security strategy."

"It's the very beginning of a new wave of activism on this war. There's a real sense that something is beginning to move."--Tom Andrews, fmr Maine Rep. and executive director of Win Without War, Los Angeles Times, Friday June 17, 2005

Poll numbers have been encouraging...success now hinges upon pressuring big media into giving ::gasp:: objective coverage and inquiry...AP finally caught up, let's see if networks will follow.

"Sit and Spin Zone"

Faux News was really in fine form yesterday. They demonized Durbin, polled their misled viewers to "prove" Americans want to keep Gitmo open (recall that 80% of people who got their news from Fox had misperceptions about the war in Iraq), and aired car chases. Basically they did everything in their power to avoid talking about yesterday's public hearing on the Downing Street memo (which Yahoo! headlines only described this morning as "Hearings sought on 'Downing Street Memo'").

My favorite clip was online though--in a feeble attempt to write off Kucinich's bipartisan coalition calling for an Iraq exit strategy, Fox called republican Reps. Walter Jones and Ron Paul the more "eccentric members" of the GOP (citing an unnamed source--as usual).

Eccentric? Sure, if you're talking right winger--after all, Walter Jones is the father of "freedom fries" (and don't forget "freedom toast"!).

"I just feel that the reason of going in for weapons of mass destruction, the ability of the Iraqis to make a nuclear weapon, that's all been proven that it was never there."

Why the change of heart? He attended the funeral of sergeant killed in Iraq and was moved by the words of the GI's widow. Perhaps if we were seeing more of these flag draped caskets, more Americans and lawmakers would reconsider the occupation.

Until then, Fox will do its damndest to spin poll numbers, like yesterday's CBS poll showing only 37% of Americans approve of Bush's handling of the war. Here comes the PR campaign...

Drum Major Institute

"Too often, the left operates in silos. There are the people who work on health care, and those who focus on economic development, and the environment, and voting rights, and too often, we operate in isolation from each other. We need to challenge those tired orthodoxies. That’s DMI’s mission as an organization." -Andrea Batista Schlesinger, Executive Director of DMI

Lame excuse for an illegal war

via Raw Story--another secret memo just released by The Times shows that Tony Blair's cabinet felt it was “necessary to create the conditions” that would legitimate the invasion of Iraq. They knew the US would be using UK bases, and they would be complicit in any US undertaking, so they knew they'd better come up with a legal excuse to go to war. Given that "regime change" isn't adequate justification for invasion under international law (the memo made sure to note US unilateralism on this--"US views of international law vary from that of the UK and the international community"), their only option was to make sure Saddam refused to cooperate with UN inspections. Funny, given that "Blair and Bush...repeated during their Washington summit last week, that they turned to the UN in order to avoid having to go to war." A UN ultimatum was their only chance.

AMERICAblog has more.

Democrats led by Conyers are scheduled to hold a hearing this Thursday on the Downing Street memo--this one ought to be used as additional evidence. We demand answers.

D'ohio

From Common Dreams--keep your eyes peeled for developments on this. Corporate media sure as hell isn't gonna do it for you, after successfully ignoring the Downing Street Memo and murmurs of impeachment as 160,000 Americans sign a letter by John Conyers to demand Bush address the damning evidence that he sent us to war on false pretenses...

ANYWAY, here's the newsflash--as if there wasn't enough to prove that Ohio was Florida 2000 Redux:

U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur...during a statement on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday night, said "there is a major political scandal that is unfolding in the state of Ohio."

"The governor of our state has permitted millions and millions of dollars of workers' money from the Ohio Worker's Compensation Fund to be invested in high-risk investments"...

Democrats such as Miss Kaptur and U.S. Rep. Sherrod Brown of Lorain say the latest scandals mirror problems in Washington and even call into question the results of the 2004 presidential election...

"I think the George Bush campaign raised a lot of illegal money in Ohio," Mr. Brown said. "That puts the election in some question. I know these people stop at nothing and I know their incompetence kept a significant number of people from getting to vote."

Fixing intelligence, fixing elections, fixing social security...right wingers sure are industrious little buggers. Kinda like termites.

Back to studying for my oxymoronic global business ethics final--so many Enrons and WorldComs and Tycos, so little time. Oy.

They don't call it BJU for nothing

via Raw Story--Bob Jones University bans Abercrombie and Fitch from its oh so daring "leave room for Jesus in that ankle length moo moo, ladies" dress code, citing "antagonism to Christ."

BJU does, however, fully endorse Urban Outfitters' Jesus friendly "Jesus is my homeboy" shirts.



Funny, the certifiably most uptight school in the US didn't seem to have a problem with cross-dressing among members of its squeaky clean admissions staff:

Q: How did you meet your wife?
A: We sang in an opera (Aida) on campus and had to dress as Egyptians. She must have really liked me because I had to wear a blue dress and dark eye shadow the whole time.

That's hot repressed lovin right there.

The American Daydream

Going along with material I'm studying for a contempory world systems final...
From Bob Herbert of the NYT:

Put the myth of the American Dream aside. The bottom line is that it's becoming increasingly difficult for working Americans to move up in class. The rich are freezing nearly everybody else in place, and sprinting off with the nation's bounty.

Economic mobility in the United States - the extent to which individuals and families move from one social class to another - is no higher than in Britain or France, and lower than in some Scandinavian countries. Maybe we should be studying the Scandinavian dream.

As far as the Bush administration is concerned, the gap between the rich and the rest of us is not growing fast enough. An analysis by The Times showed the following:

"Under the Bush tax cuts, the 400 taxpayers with the highest incomes - a minimum of $87 million in 2000, the last year for which the government will release such data - now pay income, Medicare and Social Security taxes amounting to virtually the same percentage of their incomes as people making $50,000 to $75,000. Those earning more than $10 million a year now pay a lesser share of their income in these taxes than those making $100,000 to $200,000."

Too close to home quote of the day

"[The United States was] still in the intellectual thrall of the megalomaniacal and self-righteous clergyman-president who gave to the American nation the blasphemous conviction that it, like he himself, had been created by God 'to show the way to the nations of the world how they shall walk in the paths of liberty.'" -international-relations critic William Pfaff on WWI Wilsonian politics

Jar Jar Bush

Despite the fact that I've always been more of a Trekkie, and the movie was a flop:


(Thanks to David for this one.)

Wonder if any of the fans are political enough to strike back (yea yea, pun intended) for the misappropriation of "Star Wars" to describe weaponizing space? Or better yet, did Lucas sell the rights? His politics are pretty apparent:

"I'm more on the liberal side of things," he says...Lucas' own geopolitics can sound pretty bleak: "All democracies turn into dictatorships—but not by coup. The people give their democracy to a dictator, whether it's Julius Caesar or Napoleon or Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, the general population goes along with the idea...One day Princess Leia and her friends woke up and said, 'This isn't the Republic anymore, it's the Empire. We are the bad guys. Well, we don't agree with this. This democracy is a sham, it's all wrong.'"

Return of the Sith's not so conspicuous political message is his own hyper-commercialized way of calling out the imperialists (though I'm afriad they'll never be as conscientious as Leia)...probably why it's so easy to draw parallels like this (like you've never seen it...posted on every TA's door in the humanities and social sciences building at UCSB for the last 2 years...Christ it's really been that long):





Roosevelt goes big time

The Times did a story on the Roosevelt Institution last week. Been following them for a while, did a story a while back and considered starting a branch of the think tank at UCSB before I got into the idea of starting a paper with Tizzie P instead. I met the guys from Stanford at the State Dems conference--they're very outgoing and ambitious, and as the article pointed out, "show no signs of an inferiority complex" (to say the least). Good to see that progressive students are getting national attention. While I agree with and enthusiastic about the premise of the Institution, that it act as a means to bring forth students' energy and untapped intellectual capital, I'm concerned that some students might get turned off by the perception of Ivy League elite leadership. It'll be especially important for Roosevelt to give public institutions a mouthpiece as they grow.

A little too ironic, doncha think?

You can't make this stuff up:

"There's an alternative to the destruction of life," he said. "But the stem cell issue is really one of federal funding, that's the issue before us, and that is whether or not we use taxpayers' money to destroy life. ... I don't believe we should." -Bush at a Rose Garden press conference today

Oh wait, you mean this life?


5 day old embryo

Gotcha, then it's okay to destroy this life.


Iraqi children

No wonder Rove has to ball gag Bush. He indicts himself and his war every time he opens that pie hole of his.

I love wi-fi in the summertime

Java's

Not so fast, Scottie

I was sitting next to Common Dreams' Russell Mokhiber at a White House press conference, sneering at Scott McLellan last November when Mokhiber posed this question:

Mokhiber: Kofi Annan in September said that the Iraq war is an illegal war. If it is an illegal war, then the 100,000 who have died there – according to the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health – are victims of war crimes. Now, the President is going to Canada later this year. And the largest circulation newspaper in Canada (the Toronto Star) printed a column yesterday titled “Should Canada Indict Bush?” – raising the question of a war crimes prosecution. They have a war crimes law in Canada. And I’m wondering –

Scott McLellan: Do you have a question or is it just a statement of opinion?

Mokhiber: No, this is the question. Has the White House counsel looked at the President’s legal exposure to a war crimes prosecution?

Scott McLellan: It is a ridiculous question that you bring up. You were out on the Nader campaign at the time that this issue came up. It was addressed at that time. And I’m not going to go through it again.

So...Bush is immune to any sort of prosecution, eh? Then what do you have to say about this?

Coalition of citizen groups seek formal inquiry into whether Bush acted illegally in push for Iraq war

This doesn't mean Bush is headed for the Hague, but a Resolution of Inquiry is the first step of an investigation into whether his offenses warrant impeachment.

"White House press secretary Scott McClellan waived off the letter, saying he had 'no need to respond.'"

We'll see.

Nonproliferation advocates step up efforts in face of arms race threat

(This story is posted on SB IndyMedia and might air for Free Speech next week...assuming it isn't out of date.)

News of a formal push to engage the Star Wars program has fueled fears of an impending arms race perpetuated by university ties to weapons making.

The U.S. Air Force is seeking President Bush's approval to implement policy that will solidify plans to weaponize space. The request has sparked concerns of the start of another arms race. Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, promotes efforts to halt the star wars program.

"In order to pay for Star Wars they’re going to have to cut education, healthcare, job training,
environmental clean-up, these are the programs that will be used to pay for Star Wars, and the American people have go to speak up and say we do not want our hard earned tax dollars to be used to create a new arms race in space. "

News of the U.S. push to arm space coincides with this month's United Nations talks in NY to decide the future of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. David Krieger, President of Santa Barbara’s Nuclear Age Peace Foundation attended the opening days of the conference.

“At this treaty conference most of the countries that are non nuclear are saying 'you nuclear weapons states must stand behind the agreements that you’ve already made, you just can’t walk away from those and say we’re starting over again--that’s not acceptable to us, we want to see progress on your nuclear disarmament commitment and obligation,' and basically
that’s not happening."

The Foundation has most recently worked to raise awareness about what’s been dubbed the military industrial academic complex, the symbiosis between themilitary, high tech, and research industries. There are a number of universities nationwide that are contracted by the government to oversee weapons research. According to the National Science Foundation, John Hopkins University and Pennsylvania State each receive hundreds of millions of dollars
annually. Higher education’s dependence on federal funding for weapons research empowers the department of defense to influence university policies, particularly on the contentious issue of campus military recruitment.

Speaking to students in Santa Barbara, David Krieger describes the University of California's relationship to nuclear weapons production.

“You, all of you at the University of California have a relation to nuclear weapons because your University, the University of California, has provided management and oversight for a United States nuclear lab for the past more than 60 years and continue to do that, so that means that as great as this university may otherwise be, it is complicit in making weapons of mass destruction.”

The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has distributed its student published demilitarization guide to schools around the country in an effort to raise awareness of university ties to nuclear arms research and production. Will Parrish is coordinator of the UC Nuclear Free campaign at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. He is attending the UC regents meeting this week to protest the renewal of a UC contract to manage a nuclear research lab in Los Alamos, New Mexico.

“This meeting is historic because the UC has never had to competitively bid for he labs… we’ve been organizing against the UC making a competitive bid and not only is it going to enter a bid but it’s going to enter a bid with some of the most notorious corporations in the world.”

The winner of the Los Alamos contract will be decided at the end of this year.

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation online

From free love to free market?

John Tierney of the NYT is in denial once again, this time trying to co-opt John Lennon’s vision of a world without war in his column “Give Peace a Chance.”

He puts forth a caveat which completely devastates his argument—notwithstanding the genocide in Darfur and the occupation of Iraq (which constitute only some the most horrifying examples of violence on the globe), the level of “organized violence” has dropped in recent years. What about “disorganized” violence—manifest in bombings, stemming from social inequality and frustration over U.S. hegemony—the brand of violence the “war on terror” purports to be combating, and so ineptly addresses?

This column is just another one of his desperate attempts to convince people that “freedom is on the march,” similar to his hairbrained notion that the news media is blowing violence in Iraq out of proportion, and that naturally the logical solution is to cease reporting on the violence. Sure, if there’s a war in a forest and there’s no one around to document it, it probably isn’t happening. See no evil, hear no evil--Iraqis are handing soldiers flowers.

Tierney has imbibed Julian Simon and the other irrational cornucopians from Cato. Their favorite argument is essentially that “the globe is a hollow sphere filled with oil, and the dynamic duo of the market and human ingenuity will save us even if we suck it dry.” This makes me want to tear my hair out:

“‘I predict that the incidence of war will decline,’ [Simon] told me in 1996, two years before his death. He based his prediction on the principle that there is less and less to be gained economically from war. As people get richer and smarter, their lives and their knowledge become far more valuable than the land, minerals and natural resources they used to fight over.”

I’ve really come to resent this blind idealism—it’s weakly supported by economic theory that neglects any of the external factors that exist in the real world. “The market will set us free,” “the market will lift all boats”…assuming your boat’s a yacht.

It’s no surprise that conservatives want to maintain the status quo. Representing the wealthier, aristocratic echelons of society, they’re the prime beneficiaries of their own corporate-happy imperialistic tendencies. So of course they would be loath to admit that the war in Eurasia is going poorly and the deregulatory juggernaut is speeding impending environmental disaster. They’re content to remain perched in their ivory towers, handing down regressive, militaristic mandates under the guise of the world’s “benign power,” spouting platitudes as they single-handedly send the world careening towards destruction. I dare say that not even they would be safe from climate change and wars of subsistence over fuel and water.

Conservatives often have popular support because they tell people what they want to hear--take the blue pill, maintain the delusion that everything is peachy.

Progressives want to make changes in policy that will benefit the greatest number in the long term. Change isn’t easy, and neither is admitting the path you're on isn't the best one. Progress requires a critical examination of a situation—acknowledging reality—then recognizing the challenges on the road to improvement, and following through. This flies in the face of the ignorance and false ideals of those who would prefer to put on blinders and go on “faith” alone.

This won’t come as a surprise, but we have our work cut out for us. Rather than go soft and centrist, we’ve got to open a can of New Deal era whoop-ass and give Americans an alternative to the lies and false security. We could hardly go wrong if we employed some of our opponent’s aggressive tactics—minus the lying, cheating, and scumbaggery—to not only defend the progressive stance and put forth positive policy, but to dismantle the right, and call them out for what they are: greedy, selfish, short-sighted, stuck in the past, and—in the infamous words of John Stewart—hurting America.

(side note: expanding the audience a bit--posting diaries on dKos now.)

White House press availability? Feh!

Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai invited the White House press corps to a question and answer session yesterday. Everything went well--flowery, grammatically incorrect pontificating business as usual. Only one thing was missing--the press. They had to fill seats with interns--and not even Talk Radio News interns that pretend to be legitimate members of the press (and in some cases are more legit than most)--but White House interns.

Reporters are fed up with Bush's staged substance-free press availabilities and would rather skip it than sit still while Bush speaks and remain a silent, approving audience. One member of the press corps lamented, "since we can't ask questions, why schlep over there?" Please tell me that was Ellen :).

Duped

"Our nation is the greatest force for good in history."
-President George W. Bush,
Crawford, Texas, August 31, 2002

My grandpa had a birthday on Friday, so I gave him a call (after a little parental prodding). I've unfortunately never been very close to my grandparents, so conversations usually consist of "how's the weather," "how's school," and "do you have a boyfriend/where are my great-grandkids" (okay, maybe not that far). And if I'm talking to the WWII vet grandpa, then I hear about Camp Pendleton and his travels in Asia.

Our usual fluffy conversation took a turn yesterday when he said something about Hitler and Hirohito and their being bent on world domination. Having just finished a book about U.S. militarism and imperialism, I remarked that we were seeing a similar situation today with the war. He took that as a reference to Saddam, not Bush, and he told me "honey, you've got your countries mixed up" when I brought up U.S. sanctions on Iraq to point out some of what the U.S. has done to earn its current reputation. It all became eerily familiar when he said the U.S. was just "trying to help Iraqis find freedom," but that they didn't want or understand freedom, and had their heads in the sand. I tried to explain that democracy can't be imposed, and that there has to be cultural sensitivity, but he seemed to have a pretty narrow view of the Muslim world, that it was backwards and that Americans were smarter because they didn't kill their own people (Oklahoma city? Civil War?).

It was needless to say a pretty exasperating conversation. He's a very liberal guy, and he doesn't trust Bush, so I was pretty shocked and disappointed to hear him spit back the right's rhetoric. The thing is, he was projecting the WWII view of the world onto what's going on today (in the same way that Bush and Rice are taking a Cold War era view). During WWII, the U.S. was justified in taking action, and it was a noble fight. My grandpa's generation deserves to be honored for that. What's going on today in Iraq is illegitimate and is in no way the same battle, and that's something that's misunderstood.

Blogging backlog

Been preoccupied with midterms and pitching a story to Free Speech...now to imporantant blogging business.

Follow-up:

-Posada faces deportation, after 2 months of being in the U.S. without government action...the question is whether he'll be sent to Venezuela to face murder charges in connection with the downing of a Cuban airliner. The administration is between a rock and a hard place--concede to Chavez and Castro's wishes, or violate its own policy and harbor a terrorist.

-Senate Democrats charge that Bolton perjured himself, lying about seeking George Tenet's help to discipline a dissenting intelligence officer. Have any democrats pointed out that as UN Ambassador, Bolton, with his petulance and recklessness, would be a threat to national security? Security is an idea that's been co-opted by the right, but for all their talk, security is subverted by hardliner ideology and poor policy and funding.

As for the Newsweek scandal--

FAIR points out:

"Newsweek was right to retract the Quran story--mainly because the magazine claimed to have 'sources' for the information, when Newsweek's subsequent descriptions of how it acquired the story mention only a single source. But it's far from clear that Newsweek's source was inaccurate in saying that U.S. investigators had uncovered abuse of a Quran in the course of a recent investigation; similar allegations have repeatedly been made by former Guantanamo prisoners."

Why denounce government policy that perpetuates an illegal war and human rights violations when you can attack the "liberal media"?

from Alternet:

"It's part of the tried-and-true strategy of demonize, disguise, and divert. Demonize the news media to disguise the real causes of the resistance to occupation and divert attention from failed U.S. policies. The irony is that the U.S. corporate news media deserve harsh criticism for coverage of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- not for possibly getting one fact wrong, but for failing to consistently challenge the illegality of both wars and the various distortions and lies that the Bush administration has used to mobilize support for those illegal wars."

Emphasis on this one incident ignores that broader reality that the riots were more in protest of the U.S. occupation in general, than the specific Koran desecration:

"The frustration with U.S. policy that fuels these demonstrations isn't limited to the Koran incident, and to reduce the unrest to one magazine story is misleading. Indeed, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a news conference last week that the senior commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Carl Eichenberry, reported that the violence 'was not at all tied to the article in the magazine.'"

So I'm sitting listening to panelists at UCSB's 2nd annual Afrogeeks conference, and a speaker just referred us to blogger La Shawn Barber (she's been endorsed by Michelle Malkin, so you know where she's coming from). She puts in her two cents on the defiling of the Koran, noting "why Islam is disrespected" and self-righteously touting the Christian notion that "the words of the Bible are written in the hearts of the believers" and that to have any other belief is absurd:

"Physical objects are not to revered or worshiped, and they hold no 'sacred' power. Islam obviously teaches something entirely different. I think it’s ridiculous for the United States to cater to prisoners of war in this way, no matter what their religion."

Nevermind the fact that many of these prisoners are held without being charged, and without the chance for a fair trial. And even if they are guilty, torture and disregard for cultural sensitivities are still unacceptable and must stop, at the very least out of concern for the U.S. reputation and future of diplomatic relations, if not out of decency and respect for human dignity.

Freedom of the press conference

Bill Moyers delivered a great speech at the 2005 National Conference on Media Reform in St. Louis over the weekend. The former PBS host of NOW lambasted Corporation for Public Broadcasting chairman Kenneth Tomlinson for his partisan crusade to impose right-wing politics on PBS programming, a campaign that included his hiring a consultant to monitor Moyers' show for "liberal bias." Moyers has challenged Tomlinson to a televised debate on the direction of public broadcasting.

Free Press has gathered 50,000 signatures so far this month to demand Tomlinson's resignation.

"The more compelling our journalism, the angrier the radical right of the Republican Party gets," Moyers said. "That's because the one thing they loathe more than liberals is the truth. And the quickest way to be damned by them as liberal is to tell the truth."

Listen to his speech here or watch it here (both may be slow). You can also listen to Democracy Now!'s coverage of the conference and Moyers' closing speech.

Novak wusses out

Eric Alterman was scheduled to debate Bob Novak on media bias next week at UCSB...I was excited to see Novak get his ass handed to him, but in typical cowardly form, he cancelled.

Alterman called him out in this article in The Nation. Here's his statement:

"I very much regret Robert Novak’s decision to withdraw from the Arthur N. Rupe Great Debate scheduled for May 25 at UC Santa Barbara. I had looked forward to debating the important question of media bias, as well as the implications for that issue raised by Mr. Novak’s journalistic and ethical transgressions that have made him as much a “story” as a reporter. Until now, Mr. Novak has managed to avoid being asked to answer for these transgressions, either by his employers, CNN and The Washington Post, or by other journalists. No reporter from either of these allegedly liberal media institutions has yet pressed Mr. Novak to explain his role in a probe that may see two journalists jailed. Nor has Mr. Novak been pressed to explain why he would play patsy to anonymous Bush administration officials in their attempt to destroy the reputations of two loyal and patriotic public servants -- an attempt that may have endangered national security and involved the commission of a crime. If Mr. Novak withdrew from this debate because he feared the consequences of being asked to defend his journalistic ethics in a public forum, then he made a wise decision. It is ironic, however, that someone so willing to fling unsubstantiated charges appears to lack either the courage or the sense of personal honor to answer the questions he has inspired among so many of us in the profession. I also very much regret that Mr. Novak's apparent capriciousness will cause the hard work done by so many at the University of California at Santa Barbara to go to waste."

Novak has really shown his true colors. He's mastered spitting partisan lies on his own turf, but when it comes to a hard hitting, important debate outside Crossfire, he's got nothin. It's too bad, would've been entertaining to watch him go on the defensive.

Stop Bolton!

Especially you, AK, ME, NE, OH, and RI.

http://stopbolton.org/activist/

"Fall into the funding Gap"

Did some press coverage downtown today for a protest against the Gap that my friend Elia helped organize. The Gap's corporate social responsibility record is tarnished, but improving--an LATimes article back in January cited Gap as being "a leader in the small but growing corporate movement to improve conditions for some of the world's most exploited workers." So what's our beef? The Gap's founder, Don Fisher, is a big Schwarzenegger campaign contributor. Doesn't seem right that a company that targets young people should be donating funds to a politician who leaves schools penniless.

I'd had my doubts about how impactful a small rally convincing a handful of people to boycott a huge corporation could really be. But on the way downtown, I was driving behind a truck that looked like it was owned by the Postal Service, bearing the most despicable, hate-filled banner masquerading as "patriotism" that I've seen yet--"Revenge is very sweet" emblazoned under an American flag. Disgusted, I felt a renewed sense of determination to do anything in my power to defeat that ignorant mentality and the politicians who perpetuate it.

The activist spirit was reenergized when I arrived on State St, and watched a pair of girls push through the gathering crowd. They could've been Ashlee Simpson and Paris Hilton, a couple of fake-baked cookie-cutter princesses who turned their noses up at us, responding to our signs with an indignant "ugh, what's wrong with the Gap?" only to wave away attempts at explanation as they continued their shopping trip. That's why we were on the street--to be visible to people that otherwise wouldn't give a rat's ass, to defeat the kind of indifference and apathy that has made it so easy for Americans to be blindly led. As David Krieger of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation put it before my class today, "silence is a sin." We take action how we can, and if it means going after campaign contributors to weaken an irresponsible governor's base and ultimately restore good progressive governance, we do it.

Now, what to do with that underwear I bought from the Gap...perhaps send them to the governor's mansion? I'm betting that's where part of the money I used to purchase them went anyway--Fisher's given Ahnold a quarter mil. Ehh, on second thought, that might tickle the Gropeinator's fancy a bit too much...

Neuroscience of sexuality

A Swedish study shows women and gay men have the same physiological response to male pheromones, suggesting that sexual preference is more nature than nurture.

"The different pattern of activity that Dr. Savic sees in the brains of gay men could be either a cause of their sexual orientation or an effect of it. If sexual orientation has a genetic cause, or is influenced by hormones in the womb or at puberty, then the neurons in the hypothalamus could wire themselves up in a way that permanently shapes which sex a person is attracted to."

Posada saga continues

Another plug for the prof. From Democracy Now!:

"...but we first turn to the reporter who interviewed Posada for the New York Times in 1998 - Ann Louise Bardach. At the time, she didn't say where he was hiding out. It was Aruba. We reached her last night at her home in Santa Barbara where she is a professor at the University of California Santa Barbara. She is a columnist for online magazine Slate and the author of 'Cuba Exile.' She talked about what Posada admitted to her and why he chose to speak out."

Hopefully our class will get the inside scoop next week after some of this blows over...

UPDATE: Common Dreams weighs in on Posada's potential to embarrass the White House.

A mother’s day for peace.

Mother's Day means more than just flowers for its founder, Julia Ward Howe. From Democracy Now!:

"Howe was very interested by the time she got to the 1870s in the Women's Movement, the Women’s Suffrage Movement, in particular, and the Franco-Prussian War – it’s not a war that most Americans or probably even most Europeans think too much about. But in 1870, she looked at this war and she began asking herself, you know, why is it that nations do this to one another, and in particular, she began thinking about what might be possible for women to do on behalf of humanity. And women in this day and age were supposed to be confined to the home. They weren't supposed to be out making speeches or working for political change. And Howe really wanted to find a way for women to express what she thought was an innate nature of love for God and love for humans. She thought that being a mother really was a powerful experience and that after having been a mother, no one could willingly see their sons go off to war to be slaughtered, so she began to organize on behalf of women for peace, basically. And again, her theory was men just seem to be innately aggressive, and the only hope for civilization is for women to speak a different kind of voice. So, she held peace conferences both in the United States and in Britain, and by 1872, she began proclaiming that June 2 every year would be a Mother's Day for Peace. And so, Mother's Day originally was not a day when dad cooked and you went to church, and the ladies got applause and everything. It was really a day for women to come together and to call men and the world to see the necessity for living in peace, rather than giving into the ravages and aggressions of war. So, yeah, Mother's Day is really a day of activism." -Valarie Ziegler, author of Diva Julia: The Public Romance and Private Agony of Julia Ward Howe

Watch a short movie that speaks to Howe's call for peace (via CodePink).

The smoking gun

...it's a memo, not a mushroom cloud. A top secret memo to newly re-elected British Prime Minister Tony Blair made it clear that Bush was set on invading almost a year before bombs were dropped, long before there was intelligence to suggest necessary action:

"The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force."

Two countries, two liars re-elected.

UPDATE: FAIR implicates the MSM for its standard inattention to stories like this that indict the administration.

UPDATE 2: CNN picks up the story at last...

Disarmament--it's not rocket science

Peace activists rallied outside the UN in NY earlier this week at the start of a monthlong convention to conduct a scheduled review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Long time disarmament advocate Dr. Helen Caldicott:

"Let's for God's sake talk about the real moral issues of our time," she said. "Not stem cell research, gay marriage or abortion. Let's talk about whether or not the whole of the world survives, life on the planet survives."

Amen.

In the tradition of his oreo cookie military spending math, Ben (of Ben & Jerry and TrueMajority) gives an astounding visual of U.S. nuclear weapons stockpiles. Watch the 90 second movie here.

UPDATE: Robert McNamara's piece from Foreign Policy, "Apocalypse Soon"

"When the president talks to God"

Bright Eyes was a guest on The Tonight Show earlier this week--this ain't your typical fluffy boy band Leno performance. Watch the video here. (courtesy of Nico)

"When the President Talks to God"

When the president talks to God
Are the conversations brief or long?
Does he ask to rape our women's' rights
And send poor farm kids off to die?
Does God suggest an oil hike
When the president talks to God?
When the president talks to God
Are the consonants all hard or soft?
Is he resolute all down the line?
Is every issue black or white?
Does what God say ever change his mind
When the president talks to God?
When the president talks to God
Does he fake that drawl or merely nod?
Agree which convicts should be killed?
Where prisons should be built and filled?
Which voter fraud must be concealed
When the president talks to God?
When the president talks to God
I wonder which one plays the better cop
We should find some jobs. the ghetto's broke
No, they're lazy, George, I say we don't
Just give 'em more liquor stores and dirty coke
That's what God recommends
When the president talks to God
Do they drink near beer and go play golf
While they pick which countries to invade
Which Muslim souls still can be saved?
I guess god just calls a spade a spade
When the president talks to God
When the president talks to God
Does he ever think that maybe he's not?
That that voice is just inside his head
When he kneels next to the presidential bed
Does he ever smell his own bullshit
When the president talks to God?
I doubt it
I doubt it.

from Kos and AlterNet

Media panel

Had another guest speaker in global journalism on Monday--freelance writer and "global soul" Pico Iyer. As someone who has written and traveled so extensively, his insight and optimismon the direction of globalization were encouraging. He views global integration and adaptation less as a form of cultural imperialism and more as an opportunity to engender understanding between disparate cultures...all well and good, assuming the integration isn't unilaterally and militarily rammed down people's throats.

Next up:

"Media Ownership and Media Bias: A Crisis in the Newsroom"

Saturday, May 7th 3pm
The Lobero Theater, 33 E. Canon Perdido St. in SB

Journalistand Professor Anne Louise Bardach of The Media Project at UCSB will moderatea discussion between Lionel Barber of Financial Times, New York Times Editor Bill Keller, Jacob Weisberg of Slate, and blogger Virginia Postrel.

Here's what Keller has to say about blogging:

"While he celebrated the blogger’s ability to uncover breaking news, he noted that a blog’s inherent bias might be detrimental to the reader. 'A blog is still a view of the world through a pinhole,' he said, noting that it can sometimes fall as low as being a 'one man circle jerk.'"

And the MSM doesn't do its share of intellectual masturbation?

Speaking of crisis in the newsroom--you've probably read about the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's attempts to silence independent voices on PBS by monitoring programming for dissenting opinions. Join Free Press and tell him that partisan media influence won't be tolerated.

Seems to be a right wing coup at the CPB. From AlterNet:

"Mitchellwent on the record, telling The New York Times 'I do think there have been instances of attempts to influence content from a political perspective tha tI do not consider appropriate.'

"Among the attempts cited by the Times: the hidden hiring of a consultant by CPB Board Chairman Ken Tomlinson to 'review' the content of 'NOW with Bill Moyers'; Tomlinson's assistance inlining up $5 million in corporate financing and subsequent PBS distribution of 'The Journal Editorial Report,' the weekly chat show featuring members of the conservative editorial board of the Wall Street Journal; his penchant for involving the White House in matters ranging from legislation affecting the CPB board to addressing concerns about 'objectivity and balance;' all the way to remarks at a 'fun occasion' -- a post-election meeting last November-- when Tomlinson told PBS officials, including Mitchell, that they ought to make sure their programming better reflected the Republican 'mandate.'"

This organization is made possible by a grant from the federal government, the republican noise machine, and by support from viewers like you.

Anti-military recruitment campaign picking up speed

With recruitment levels falling short for the third month in a row, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers has told Congress that the military is on the verge of being dangerously overextended. Recruiters on campuses are getting desperate, suggesting unethical strategies to students who would otherwise be ineligible to join the army.

The battle over military presence on campuses has now reached the Supreme Court, with the justices agreeing Monday to hear a case that will decide whether the military can recruit at federally funded colleges and universities.

Joining students from universities around the country, activists from the Student Commission on Racial Equality and the LGBT Resource Center at UCSB have been embroiled in a battle to get the military off campus. The military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is inconsistent with UC principles of non-discrimination, and the Academic Senate has proposed a resolution that will bar recruiters from UCSB. Read their editorial in today's Santa Barbara News Press:

"The military's 'don't ask don't tell' policy forces a person to suppress and hide her/his identity. Why is an institution of higher education allowing this discriminatory agency to recruit on its campus? UCSB's own nondiscrimination policy states: 'It is the policy of the University not to engage in discrimination against or harassment of any person employed or seeking employment with the University of California on the basis of race, color, national origin, sexual orientation, citizenship, or status as a covered veteran.' This policy must extend to anyone who steps onto campus. Should not UCSB enforce this policy where military recruiting is concerned?"

A town hall meeting on campus military presence will be held today at 3:30 pm in the McCune conference room on the 6th floor of the Humanities and Social Sciences building. The meeting’s outcome is expected to impact voting on the resolution.

First Lady-o-Laughs

Bush's landscaping technique unsurprisingly consistent with his foreign policy:

"George's answer to any problem at the ranch is to cut it down with a chain saw, which, I think, is why he and Cheney and Rumsfeld get along so well." -Laura Bush

Blogging the blogger

Slate writer and self-proclaimed "self-hating democrat" Mickey Kaus paid UCSB a visit on Monday, giving an introduction to blogging in my global journalism class. Kaus was introduced as a pioneer in the field, and the #1 blogger (which I'm not even sure you could quantify, but just going by hits I'd say it's Kos, not Kaus, by a landslide--roughly 400,000/day!).

I was pretty skeptical about what he had to say...I wanted to know what his deal was, you couldn't be too sure just from reading KausFiles on Slate (though I found he generally seems to come down on the right, rather than the left side of the fence). Someone at DailyKos addressed him as "uber-hack." I couldn't really say if this was the case, so I waited to see if he might suggest it himself.

He commented that the "media concentration issue is dead," (I beg to differ, media is still contracting), and that in spite of the largest blogs being liberal, conservative blogs in the ratings tail (that receive no traffic, mind you) dominate the blogosphere. A study from MyDD shows they do not, though if they did, it'd be through unreasoned attacks and insults (in spite of what Kaus said about lefty blogs being more extreme). Kaus reasoned that there must be more conservative blogs because embattled conservatives feel there's a need to counteract the liberal media bias propogated by CNN and the NYT (@#%$*&!!!). Funny, there seems to be some collusion between the MSM and blogs, (on CNN, that bastion of liberal power, no less!) but not surprisingly, neither the MSM outlets, nor the blogs they feature, are liberal.

Oh, and Kaus also made a quip about terrorist blogs and the Dean internet movement. After saying them in almost the same breath, he noted that he should be careful not to draw any parallels between the two...har. He actually quoted Rush Limbaugh during the talk, so perhaps that's the source of his material.

My guess is he was probably right in saying that there isn't really a place for "wishy washy centrists" like himself in the blogosphere (though truth be told Kaus is probably only a bit more fair and balanced than Fox). From the Centrist Coalition blog--"what really bugs me is, they're ignoring the center again. Say something about us. Bash us! We exist."

You have no choice.

From the NYTimes:

"The House passed a bill on Wednesday making it a federal crime for any adult to transport an under-age girl across state lines to have an abortion without the consent of her parents."

Representatve Nita Lowey of NY on the decision:

"'Under this legislation, those who feel they cannot turn to their parents when facing an unintended pregnancy will be forced to fend for themselves without any help from a responsible adult. Some will seek unsafe abortions close to home. Others will travel to unfamiliar places seeking abortions by themselves.'"

This, combined with a parental notification initiative penned for the California special election ballot places girls living in abusive households in an ever more precarious position. Sure, it'd be nice if everyone had a communicative, loving relationship with their parents, and could involve them in such a difficult decision. But there must be provisions for those who can't, and this cannot be made a judge's decision...if a girl feels shamed, what makes people think she would be comfortable discussing her situation in court? Why don't we protect the lives and well-being of the women and girls we have before we consider the potential life she might be forced to bring into the world?

Shiney happy people

UCSB's Storke Plaza had a special visitor yesterday--a chubby, pleasant old man with a white handlebar mustache...no, not Santa. Not John Bolton, either. It was none other than Santa Barbara's very own card carrying--er, 6ft tall sign carrying homophobic Christian zealot! Yay!!! All the kiddies gathered around born again street preacher Paul Johnson as he spouted off about sodomy, androgyny and how us "women all look like men." Apparently we'll all be spending eternity in hell for attending UCSB instead of a REAL institution like Bob Jones University. Too bad the old man only dug himself deeper the more he smited us with his righteous sign (propped up in a gun holster, imagine that)--his presence alone galvanized activists and inadvertently furthered the Queer Student Union's cause, by bolstering Queer Pride week activities.

These street preachers have a rich tradition, always raining their hellfire and damnation anywhere there is heathen tolerance and pagan pride. Take my favorite Market St. staple--Mr. "No Sloppy Seconds." Reverend Owens Diaz brandishes signs that say "No unlawful sex" and chants such catchy slogans as "Sex only between a virgin woman and a virgin man. No leftovers. Sex outside of marriage makes the woman a whore and the man a whoremonger." Reverend, what exactly are leftovers? What, no doggy bag? Reminds me of one of Margaret Cho's jokes...but I won't get into it, my parents read this thing.

Anyone interested in putting down the signs and engaging in a civil dialogue about what Jesus really WOULD do?? Bill Maher via Kos:

"I don't believe in the Christianity that says one thing and then goes and kills innocent people and tries to rob women of their fundamental human right to control their reproductive lives, or deny people of the same sex their right to be married and have relationships and is judgmental and narrow-minded, and angry and vengeful. That is not the Jesus Christ that I believe in."
--Jane Fonda

"There are some people out there who are Christians...who believe that homosexuality is a sin. You know what? I'm a Christian. I do believe that it's a sin. You know what else? I believe divorce is a sin. Guess what? I've been divorced. Guess what? Jesus talks about divorce a lot more than he talks about homosexuality. I don't know why people obsess over it so much, but they do. Wait a second, I do know why they obsess over it. Because they get votes bashing gays."
--Joe Scarborough (wha-wha-what?!)

Some have signs, others have blogs. To each his own...as long as you're not imposing your beliefs on anyone by waving around obnoxious signs. Wait...


"Sinners!!! Blaaaaaaaaaarg"
(...well yea, this is UCSB forcryingoutloud.)

picture from the Nexus

Senate nuclear nonproliferation

Textbook definitions from The Daily Show's America (with just a hint of sarcasm in the first one):

1. A judicial activist sees the Constitution as a living document that can be adapted and re-interpreted to protect the needs of a changing society, such as "marriage between sodomites" and "impulse abortions."

2. A strict constructionist interprets the Constitution according to the language and original intent of the text at the time of its writing, in much the same way as a fundamentalist views the Bible. Fortunately for strict constructionists, they have been endowed by God with the superhuman gift of being able to read the minds of people who died 200 years ago. Naturally, they use this power only for good.

Just the kind of judges we would want--those who subvert reason for religious convictions and blind faith in the immutability of a document. You're right, no need for the filibuster. But wait...what's this? The majority of Americans want to protect the Senate's ability to block the nomination of unfit judges like Whitey "what civil rights?" McRacist (::cough:: Pickering ::cough::) and the Honorable Oliver Wendell Homophobe (no relation to the justice who ruled that shouting fire in a theater isn't protected under the first ammendment...you can learn that one from America too). According to the WaPo ABC News poll:

"By a 2 to 1 ratio, the public rejected easing Senate rules in a way that would make it harder for Democratic senators to prevent final action on Bush's nominees. Even many Republicans were reluctant to abandon current Senate confirmation procedures: Nearly half opposed any rule changes, joining eight in 10 Democrats and seven in 10 political independents, the poll found."

So why are Democrats acquiescing?

"Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) said that under such a deal, Democrats would allow a vote on some of President Bush's seven controversial nominees to the federal bench, while others would be withdrawn by the White House. "

C'mon, Bush has still got his recess appointments! No need to give in here, right? But as Kos points out, Reid is actually painting Dems as flexible and concilliatory with his proposal, making Frist and the Republicans look like the stubborn stalwarts they are for not agreeing to compromise. We may yet win this one.

Oy gevalt!

I'm feeling a little verklempt on this matzah-less Passover...some matzah rap is definitely in order.

Et tu, Dean?

As the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan rises to nearly $300 billion, and a report says there are more terrorists today than ever before, Howard Dean comes out in support of keeping troops in Iraq.

From Democracy Now!

"The chair of the Democratic National Committee Howard Dean has come out in support of President Bush"s current Iraq policy. In a speech earlier this week in Minnesota, Dean said, 'The president has created an enormous security problem for the United States where none existed before. But I hope the president is incredibly successful with his policy now that he's there.' Dean said a US pullout could endanger the United States in three ways: By leaving a Shiite theocracy worse than that in Iran; by creating an independent Kurdistan in the north, with destabilizing effects on neighboring Kurdish regions of Turkey, Iran and Syria, and by making the so-called Sunni Triangle a magnet for what Dean called Islamic terrorists similar to the former Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Dean was portrayed as an antiwar candidate in the media during the 2004 presidential race."

Alright, so he's not for the war, but he's not calling for a timetable for withdrawal.

Dean's fears of a Shiite theocracy are shared by Noam Chomsky:

"The first thing they'll do is reestablish relations with Iran...The next thing that might happen is that a Shiite-controlled, more or less democratic Iraq might stir up feelings in the Shiite areas of Saudi Arabia, which happen to be right nearby and which happen to be where all the oil is. So you might find what in Washington must be the ultimate nightmare-a Shiite region which controls most of the world's oil and is independent."

So what's the solution? Before the elections in January, Ted Kennedy weighed the options:

"President Bush has left us with few good choices. There are costs to staying, and costs to leaving. There may well be violence as we disengage militarily from Iraq and Iraq disengages politically from us, but there will be much more violence if we continue our present dangerous and destabilizing course. It will not be easy to extricate ourselves from Iraq, but we must begin."

UPDATE: Dennis Kucinich writes an open letter to Dean for The Nation:

"We can draw no clearer distinction with the President than over this war. He cannot right a wrong (unjustified war) by perpetuating a military occupation. Military victory there is not possible. General Tommy Franks concedes that. The war will end when we say it's over. The Democratic leadership should be pressing for quick withdrawal of all troops from Iraq."

"Who ever heard of a good piece of elephant?"

I've been recovering the last couple days from my weekend adventure to the California State Democratic Party's Convention in LA. Dems are recovering from November's defeat, but they're still struggling to come up with a coherent vision and message for the party. There was a lot of pontificating and preaching to the choir (fitting for all this Pope talk) and really little evidence of solid, effective strategies for winning elections. They've gotta learn to be bold and have some conviction.

Dean spoke at a dinner on Saturday--in keeping with George Lakoff's Don't Think of an Elephant, he talked about how people vote their values, with their hearts rather than their heads, and that Democrats need a positive agenda--but this is not to say they need to change their core values and go further right. Dean said Democrat ideals are moral values--this is true, progressives value peace, taking care of their families and their neighbors, protecting the earth, caring for the sick and the disempowered...I just wince whenever I hear "moral values," not because I'm a godless heathen as conservatives would charge, but because it's such a loaded abstract term, and it's disappointing that we're still on that kick from the election when everyone decided to make a bad poll the authority on what's important to voters.

Dean did say something that caught my attention, a strong message that effectively sums up the difference between liberals and conservatives on domestic policy: it's a "question of whether we are responsible for one another as a community or not," whether policies are inclusive and honest, or divisive and deceptive. The message is sac up, Democrats. The party of fiscal irresponbility and lies needs to be called on the carpet for its deeds.

And speaking of lies, House Majority leader Tom DeLay also had a busy weekend, as keynote speaker at a convention of another kind...The National Rifle Association's annual get together. Everyone's probably already heard this, but his quote is worth repeating:

"When a man is in trouble or in a good fight, you want to have your friends around, preferably armed. So I feel really good."

Excellent. Nukes in the Senate, and gun toting crazies in the House. Yeehaw!

Cuban militant seeks asylum in U.S.

Former CIA operative Luis Posada Carriles, a Cuban exile who's spent the last 4 decades trying to violently overthrow Fidel Castro, is seeking to enter the U.S. Posada went to prison for his involvement in the downing of a commercial airplane which left 74 dead, and in the bombings of Cuban tourist destinations, attacks which were aimed to destabilize the Cuban economy and spark revolution.

After his last arrest around the time of the 2000 presidential elections, a man with links to Posada told investigative journalist (and UCSB professor) Ann Louise Bardach that Posada and others were relying on the election of George W. Bush so they'd be released from jail. They knew Bush would help them because Papa Bush had been so kind to them and the other Contras when he was head of the CIA in the late 70s. Don't think Posada would be feeling so welcome had Bush not won, with the help of his fellow exiles in Florida.

Ann Louise Bardach is the foremost expert reporter on Cuba, and having had exclusive interviews with Castro and Posada, she's got the scoop on this story. Should be interesting to see whether the administration will bow to the radical Cuban exile population that helped get Bush elected, and grant amnesty to a criminal. Between Elian Gonzalez, the 2000 elections, Terri Schiavo, and now this, Florida has a rich history of scandals...and the Bush dynasty has always been at the helm.

Bardach charts this history in Cuba Confidential, which I've been reading for the global journalism course she teaches...it's an interesting read, with complete background on U.S./Cuban diplomacy (or lack thereof). One thing stuck with me--NSA official James Bamford's disclosure of the Operation Northwoods, a diabolical plot aimed at legitimating a full U.S. invasion of Cuba following the Bay of Pigs disaster:

"The plan called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit, planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Fidel Castro, thus giving [Cold Warriors] the excuse to launch their war."

I defy even the most batshit insane conspiracy theorist to come up with that one. Can you put anything past these hawks?

UPDATE: Ann Louise Bardach on NPR

UPDATE 2: Bardach's Washington Post article on Posada, which Castro read on TV (not her intention)...now she's got a number of administration hawks like Otto Reich, White House envoy for the Western Hemisphere, who want her head. Here's what Bardach had to say on Reich's controversial nomination last year:

"Virtually every country in Central and South America and Mexico has complained officially or unofficially" about Reich, Bardach said. "The guy is very, very far right, and Latin America has had a very decided shift. All of Latin America is lurching to the left, and who do you have handling Latin America for the administration? Otto Reich. You've got to say to yourself: What is this administration thinking of except a few votes in Dade and Broward counties?"

"I never saw any help wanted signs for a sarcastic feminist political essayist"

Barbara Ehrenreich, workers' rights activist and author of Nickel and Dimed: On (not) Getting By in America spoke at UCSB last night. She devoted the majority of her talk to discussing her experience as a worker struggling to make it on "low low" wages exacerbated by the "Wal-Martization" of the U.S. economy. Ehrenreich denied that poverty is simply a natural phenomenon--it is the result of conscious policies. She condemned not only reckless domestic policies like welfare reform (which she called a "practice run" for republicans whose larger agenda aims to dismantle social security) but also the Bush administration's disastrous foreign policy, the debacle into which so much social spending has been misspent "If George W. Bush took an interest in poverty," she said, "what would he do, bomb it?!"

Ehrenreich also said sweatshop conditions don't exist solely in places where MNCs export labor around the globe. She said it's closer to home than some think, citing lawsuits over forced overtime without pay, and allegations brought against stores that locked workers in after hours. Ehrenreich channeling her anger over injustice and the plight of the poor into her own brand of sardonic humor, leveling blows at the establishment which forces low wage workers to resort to desperate measures. She called for the "end of the involuntary philanthropy of so many of America's people."

Her talk could not have come at a more appropriate time--just Monday the release of an LA Times article revealed that wages are being outstripped by inflation, and that while companies are making more money, earnings aren't being passed along to workers. Wealth is increasingly polarized, concentrated in the hands of CEOs. Ehrenreich said she'd heard a number of arguments on how poor women earning next to nothing could get by--one brilliant idea suggested women "marry up." Ehrenreich expressed her rightful disgust with this idea by recommending that to rectify the crisis she devoted so much time to studying, every CEO marry a woman earning a non-livable wage. She quickly took it back though, realizing that it'd be tough to find a CEO who was worth marrying...scandals at WorldCom, Enron, Tyco, and others have taken quite a few of these guys out of the running for most elligible bachelor.

Conflict of interest? Never!

Last week's merger between ChevronTexaco and Unocal has raised some suspicion among advocacy groups. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights has cried foul, denouncing a cozy relationship between the Schwarzenegger Administration and ChevronTexaco. The energy company was a big campaign contributor and has allegiances in California's capital, with a former lobbyist appointed as Schwarzenegger’s chief of staff. Amid ever increasing evidence of republican misconduct and scandal surrounding House Majority Leader Tom Delay, The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights has called for an investigation into an all expense paid trip to Australia for high ranking state officials’, hosted by oil executives last year in an effort to sell the Administration on Liquefied Natural Gas, or LNG, as a new source of electricity for the state. With ChevronTexaco’s purchase of Unocal, a big supplier of Liquefied Natural Gas from pipelines in Asia, the company has much to gain by promoting LNG, as it seems poised to corner the international market. This would provide the company with the leverage and potential to follow in the footsteps of Enron, monopolizing California’s energy and driving up prices by limiting supply...

Thought police

Russell Jacoby of The Nation shows how the idea of liberal domination at institutions of higher learning is predicated on flawed studies that don't stand up to academic rigor. Not surprising--like many ideas generated by the right, we're expected to accept this notion on faith alone. And while irrationality is completely incongruous with the goals of higher learning, somehow it's acceptable in all three branches government??
By misappropriating progressive values like equal opportunity, Horowitz and his minions are lowering the bar, softening standards of what is considered "scholarly" in order to make way for dogmatic ideologues like themselves on campuses. If a teacher who votes democratic counts as a Trotskyist, anyone "to the left of Attila the Hun" could be implicated in a McCarthyite purging of rational thinkers.

Border control

Travelers passing to and from Canada and Mexico could soon be required to present a passport, rather than just a driver's license, when crossing the U.S. border. The newly proposed federal regulation is the latest government effort to deter would be terrorists from entering the U.S. by tightening border controls. However a new study of out of the University of California, San Diego, shows that stricter security measures have unexpectedly changed the immigration patterns of undocumented immigrants from Mexico. Research by The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UCSD shows tighter border control has made it far more dangerous and costly for immigrants to cross in the U.S. As a result, those who successfully reach the U.S. or are smuggled in, are staying longer, at an average of 70 weeks, and more women and children are entering the country than before, as workers opt to emigrate with their families. Wayne Cornelius, director of the study, interviewed 600 potential migrants, 90 % of which agreed that border crossing was dangerous, but only 20% said border controls would deter them from making the trip. Border security difficulties have recently been compounded by the Minutemen, a vigilante group whose call to arms prompted a number of white supremecist organizations to travel south to intervene at the border. Immigration rights groups have expressed concern that the groups presence at the border has exacerbated an already unstable situation and fueled racist sentiment.

"Dont' hang your rosaries on my ovaries"

As democratic Senators challenge right-wing ideology and potentially restricted access to the morning after pill, refusing to confirm Bush's unfit FDA nominee, NARAL asks women's rights proponents to urge pharmacists to not withhold contraception from women. Sign a letter to prevent third parties from interfering with a woman's right.

"Sucks to your assmar!"

No more cat allergies?

"A new chemical compound, part cat and part human, may provide an end to misery-making cat allergies, U.S. researchers reported this week in the journal Nature Medicine."

Wow, maybe someday I'll actually be able to breathe without wheezing like an 80 year old when I'm within a mile of a cat. That is, unless evangelicals jump in and say doctors are playing God, creating a feline-human abomination or something along those lines.

Hannity's humble beginnings

I think I'm the only one at KCSB who didn't know that the Fox News demagogue got his start at none other than UCSB's campus radio station.

"My first gig was with my own talk radio show at the University of Santa Barbara. But it didn't last long. I was too conservative, the higher-ups said, and they didn't like the comments one guest made on the show ... The left-wing management had zero-tolerance for conservative points of view. And I was promptly fired. Once my voice was silenced, my destiny was set – do or die, I'd make my career in radio. "

Hannity the martyr...only it's just another one of his characteristically warped versions of reality:

"After airing for less than a year, Hannity's weekly show was canceled in 1989, when KCSB management charged him with 'discriminating against gays and lesbians' after airing two shows featuring the book 'The AIDS Coverup: The Real and Alarming Facts about AIDS.' Written by homophobic Christian-right activist Gene Antonio, the book crankily argued that AIDS could be spread by casual contact, including coughs, sneezes and mosquito bites. Antonio charged that the government, medical establishment and media covered up these truths in the service of 'the homosexual movement.'

"When Antonio appeared by phone on one of the shows, Hannity and his guest repeatedly slurred gay men. At one point, according to the UCSB campus newspaper The Daily Nexus, Hannity declared: 'Anyone listening to this show that believes homosexuality is a normal lifestyle has been brainwashed. It's very dangerous if we start accepting lower and lower forms of behavior as the normal.' According to the campus paper, Antonio responded by calling gay men 'a subculture of people engaged in deviant, twisted acts.'

"When a fellow KCSB broadcaster called the show to challenge the host and his guest, Hannity pointed out that the caller, a lesbian, had a child through artificial insemination, and Antonio dubbed the child a 'turkey-baster baby.' When the caller took issue with that 'disgusting' remark, Hannity followed up with 'I feel sorry for your child.'"

Not so blameless. But of course now he's mainstream, the "reigning king of talk radio."

According to hannity.com, after KCSB (which is conveniently excluded from his bio) he found work in Huntsville, Alabama--my (very) former hometown. Funny, I've been unwittingly tracing the footsteps of such a respectable individual. Perhaps one day, with a little luck and some chutzpah, I too will be a blowhard and a liar.

"Open libraries or closed minds"

A NYTimes Op-Ed highlights the fight (spearheaded by CodePink) to keep the last library in Salinas open, urging Laura Bush to join the campaign to prioritize funding for literacy and education.

"As globalization takes hold, American workers have more competition than ever before from well-educated, hard-working people in places like India and China. For the United States to maintain its standing and its standard of living, it needs to make a greater commitment to books, literacy training, materials on English as a second language, and all of the other services libraries provide."

Thomas Friedman also stresses the dire need for prioritizing education, out of America's own competitive self interest as a declining superpower in an increasingly cutthroat global labor market. He gets that education is important, but he paints a simplistic, excessively rosy "it's a small world after all"-esque picture of the globalized planet (which he's apparently just woken up to), where the playing field is level between first and third worlds, and everyone in India is content, with their wireless internet enabled laptops. Nevermind the one billion that are impoverished and the sharp stratification between the rich and the penniless.

Holding reporters accountable

FAIR takes aim at the NYTimes for its biased Cold War era-esque reporting on Nicaragua, while the Bush administration campaigns to prevent a leftist from taking power.

"The article, by Ginger Thompson, characterized the U.S. attempt to overthrow the Sandinista government as part of 'the global struggle against Communism'-- though Nicaragua under the Sandinistas had a mixed economy, multiple opposition parties and a very active opposition press, features that were not found in actual Communist countries. She refers to Daniel Ortega, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, as a 'revolutionary strongman,' even though he was elected to the presidency in 1984 with 67 percent of the vote, in balloting that international observers found to be 'free, fair and hotly contested' (Extra!, 10-11/87).

"Referring to the Sandinista-led government of the 1980s and the U.S.-sponsored Contra rebels as opposing 'armies,' Thompson wrote, 'The armies fought each other to a standstill, until both sides agreed to elections in 1990, which Mr. Ortega lost.' This summary leaves out the election that Ortega won in 1984, and wrongly suggests that the 1990 elections were held because of Contra pressure, when the Nicaraguan constitution at that time required elections to be held every six years. (That sentence also implies that the Contras directed their fight against the Nicaraguan army, although in fact they chiefly targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure--see Nicaragua: The Price of Intervention, Peter Kornbluh, pp. 39-50.) "

Hmm...wonder how elections in Iraq will be reported on down the line? Coverage is bound to become more and more distorted as it becomes more distant, and Norman Soloman demonstrates how it's obismal as it is now. History repeats itself, and the picture always gets rosier and more favorable for the U.S.:

"The London-based Guardian published a devastating essay bya university lecturer who left Iraq during Saddam Hussein’s rule. Sami Ramadani wrote: 'On Sept. 4, 1967, the New York Times published an upbeatstory on presidential elections held by the South Vietnamese puppet regimeat the height of the Vietnam War. Under the heading "U.S. encouraged byVietnam vote: Officials cite 83 percent turnout despite Vietcong terror," the paper reported that the Americans had been "surprised and heartened" by the size of the turnout "despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign todisrupt the voting." A successful election, it went on, "has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson’s policy of encouraging thegrowth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam." The echoes of this weekend’s propaganda about Iraq’s elections are so close as to be uncanny.'"

It would seem we haven't been paying attention to our history lessons.

So much for Cornucopian logic

The economist's argument that an oil shortage will be mended simply by the laws of supply and demand doesn't hold water (or oil...nyuk nyuk)--the idea that as oil prices go up, people will stop buying and start seeking alternative energy sources runs contrary to reality:

"Won't the problem take care of itself? As prices rise, people will voluntarily cut consumption, right? Well, in a 2003 article, energy economist Andrew McKillop showed that at least during the 1990s, the opposite happened. Each time oil prices rose, world demand rose within six-12 months. And over on the far side of Hubbert's peak, it will be physical reality, not economics, that governs consumption. With supply shrinking year by year, every barrel that comes out of the ground will likely be burned lickety-split." Stan Cox on Alternet

Grassroots promise

Via today's Progress Report--the Senegalese movement to end female genital mutilation is taking hold in countries around Africa. Guinea, Burkina Faso, and Mali have all followed suit, imitating Senegal's holistic approach to abolishing excision through human rights and health education and awareness. Groups like UNICEF have taken note of this success and endorsed the model.

Truly inspiring...a shining example of women's agency in the Third World, and change through empowerment at the local level.

The film Moolaadé is a powerful homage to those that began the movement. Also, one of my favorite professors at UCSB has been working on a documentary on women's organizations in the Third World called Passion for Change, and it features the women of Senegal. The trailer on its own was so moving it brought the lecture hall to tears. These are the kinds of films that should be brought to people's attention.

"Tell them babies come from the stork."

Blogs and over 100 organizations have are all over this one: Republicans are proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that they've got the "cover your ears and yell 'lalalalala' whenever sex is mentioned" market cornered with their latest magnum opus: 4parents.gov. The website takes an ignorant approach to sexual orientation, recommending counselling for kids who come out and passes off right wing talking points as facts, downplaying the effectiveness of condoms.

For the Department of Health and Human Services, "family planning" consists of timing a woman's menstrual cycle to determine when she's most fertile, and not having sex during that time. Failsafe, if you're looking to get knocked up. They don't provide information on how to properly implement such methods, and they say "natural family planning" has the same failure rate as emergency contraception, when these rates actually vary a great deal. Go to Planned Parenthood to get the facts straight.

On the negative impact of teen pregnancy (which mystically seems to happen even when teens promise not to have sex...immaculate conception, not lack of contraception...that's gotta be it):

"Did you know that teens who become parents:
-Are more likely to end up poor or on welfare;
-Have fewer job opportunities;
-Have fewer educational opportunities; and
-Are less likely to marry."

Funny, these are all side effects of Bush administration policy already.

Kids will be totally screwed (literally and figuratively, since they're more likely to get an STD if they sign abstinence petitions, and more likely to engage in kinkier activities--read Bill Maher's hi-larious take on how kids are "thinking outside the box") if this is all they've got to go on from teachers and from parents. This sad, malconceived website makes the Department of Homeland Security's oh-so-useless scare tactic, ready.gov, look like an invaluable tome (it tells people which way to shit themselves in case of a nuclear blast...check out the graphic, reminiscent of the calm airplane passengers plunging to their death on seat-back pocket cards that Tyler Durden ridicules in Fight Club).

Teens don't need scare tactics and closed mindedness in sex ed. They need communication, acceptance, and condoms. Help them get what they need.

Homicidal maniacs at the helm

"When I or people like me are running the country, you'd better flee because we will find you, we will try you and we'll execute you. I mean every word of it. I will make it part of my mission to see to it that you are tried and executed." [Addressing doctors who perform abortions, in a speech to the U.S. Taxpayers Alliance, from The Hotline, May 9, 2000]
--Randall Terry, "pro-life" spokesperson for Terri Schiavo's parents

This nut used the same language as Paul Hill, a man that decided to take it one step further and personally execute a doctor. It's beyond me how you can rationalize that when a doctor terminates a pregnancy, it's murder, but when someone kills a doctor, he's doing God's work:

"He did kill somebody, but it was justifiable homicide," says the Rev. Donald Spitz, director of Pro-Life Virginia and Hill's spiritual adviser. "Those babies needed to be protected."

A Christian fundamentalist has the propensity to be every bit as violent as an Islamic extremist, but militant Christian groups naturally receive little attention from the complicit crucifix brandishing establishment. Terrorism is made out to be an exclusively Arab pastime--makes it easier to dehumanize an entire region, ripe for the imperialist taking. I suppose we haven't heard much from organized Christian groups lately because they've had friends in high places over the last 4 years. But plenty of regular crazies (including Tom DeLay, who warned that judges "will answer for" their refusal to reopen the Schiavo case) have spouted off with the usual death threats to judges and to anyone who sought to end Terri Schiavo's suffering)

And then Bush comes out with this gem: "The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak." But his budget axed the social programs that assist the weak--the poor, the elderly, high risk youth...and what does he do for the billions of impoverished people in Third World countries who are in dire need of assistance? He sends a Wolf to guard the henhouse.

The religious right's penchant for hypocrisy is astounding.

I've said my peace on Schiavo now that she's at rest. Don't feel like perpetuating the story, it just encourages them.