Maybe a million? Demonstration draws a big crowd
Yesterday’s march on Washington for abortion rights drew hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps a million, and is front page news across the country. I looked in vain for a mention on the Tribune’s site. Instead of covering what was perhaps the largest demonstration in DC since the ‘70's, the Tribune decided to lead with a feel good story about “angels” and MADD, the conservative group fighting for a return to prohibition. Oh well. Here’s an account from AP, via SPTimes:
Abortion rights supporters marched in the hundreds of thousands Sunday, galvanized by what they see as an erosion of reproductive freedoms under President Bush and foreign policies that hurt women worldwide.
The huge crowd marched slowly past the White House, chanting and waving signs like "My Body Is Not Public Property!" and "It's Your Choice, Not Theirs!" then filled the National Mall, turning it into a sea of women, men and children.
People joined the protest from across the nation and from nearly 60 countries, asserting that damage from Bush's policies is spreading far beyond U.S. shores through measures such as the ban on federal money for family-planning groups that promote or perform abortions abroad.
The rally stretched from the base of the U.S. Capitol about a mile back to the Washington Monument. Some estimates of the number attending varied from 500,000 to 800,000, but organizers estimated the crowd at 1-million. Authorities no longer give formal crowd estimates.
It was the first large-scale abortion rights demonstration in Washington since a 1992 march, which drew 500,000, according to the National Park Police.
Carole Mehlman, 68, came from Tampa to support a cause that has motivated her to march for 30 years, as long as abortion has been legal.
"I just had to be here to fight for the next generation and the generation after that," she said. "We cannot let them take over our bodies, our health care, our lives."
Advocates said abortion rights are being weakened at the margins through federal and state restrictions and will be at risk of reversal at the core if Bush gets a second term.
"Know your power and use it," Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, House Democratic leader, exhorted the masses. "It is your choice, not the politicians'."
And feminist Gloria Steinem accused Bush of squandering international good will and taking socially conservative positions.
"The desire to control reproduction is the mark of authoritarian governments around the world and, unfortunately, it's ours, as well," she said.
Leery lawmakers’ licentiousness leads to legislative logjam
Those darn citizen initiatives... always cluttering up the ballot with way too many choices. Oh, wait...
They argue that the process is out of control. That citizens' initiatives are choking the state budget. That it's too easy for the people to amend their constitution.
Florida politicians have been making the case for constitutional amendment reform ever since a handful of high- profile citizens' campaigns bypassed them in the past few election cycles.
Indeed, voters may have to sift through as many as 16 ballot questions when they go to the polls to elect a president and other officials this November.
But don't blame out-of-control special interests or gadflies manipulating the system. Three-fourths of those ballot questions are being generated by lawmakers themselves.
While they plot to restrict citizens' ability to force change, lawmakers are moving several bills in the waning days of the legislative session that will require a public vote on their own ideas, from homestead exemptions to state budget policy.
``Unquestionably, legislatures have been far greater offenders of putting things on the ballot than the citizens,'' says Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, who opposes efforts to rein in the public's ballot box power. ``It's ironic to me that they are trying to protect citizens from themselves, when they ought to be protecting citizens from the legislators.''
Slug an Evangelical
Kristof’s column, ”Hug an Evangelical”, really pissed me off this morning. I’m not even gonna bother posting a snippet. Follow the link if you must, but the gist of his argument is that liberals are too intolerant of fundamentalists, specifically Fundamentalist Christians. I was just calming down enough to formulate a response when I found that Atrios had beaten me to it. Do follow the Atrios link and read his entire post.
I'm tired of liberalish Christians telling me it's my job to reach out to Christian moderates who feel that "the Left" is hostile to them. Screw that. It's time for liberalish Christians to tell their slightly more right-leaning brethren that those of us who fight to maintain the separation between Church and State do it to protect freedom of religion - not destroy it. It's time for moderate and liberal Catholics to take a stand against their Church's assault on Democratic (and only Democratic) politicians who deviate from doctrine.
I'm not hostile to religion. I'm hostile to those who cloak their hate in bigotry in religion. I'm hostile to those who want to impose their religion on me and everyone else. I'm hostile to those who have no understand where their freedoms come from, and why they're important. I'm hostile to Christian Exceptionalists who believe that simply by being religious they're immune from all criticism.
...couple comments. Of course there are moderate and liberal Christians/Catholics who are fighting to save their religion from being taken over by less tolerant folk. But, currently there seems to be this general notion floating around that if only the "secular left" would be a bit nicer to people who are trying to put prayer in their schools and take control of their daughters' uterus then more people would vote for Democrats. As Jon Stewart would say.... WUUUUUH? See, for example, human scum Nick Kristof, who wants me to hug an Evangelical. Screw you Kristof - damn straight I'm intolerant of people who are intolerant. And, yes, I know that doesn't include all Christians or all Evangelical Christians (I don't think Kristof has yet to really understand what ECs are anyway), but sure as hell includes anyone tangentially associated with the Christian Right.
The issue is not religion - it's religion and politics. As long as religions aren't too coercive of their members, I'm happy for people to do what they want. But, once religion gets involved in politics I have no need to be tolerant or nice about it. I can be tolerant of your religion without being tolerant of your politics. That's the issue.
I don’t think I have anything to add.
Faluja update
Details emerging from Faluja seem to confirm the sniping of Ambulances by American troops, which I first read about here.
The head of mission of a European humanitarian agency with staff in Falluja told BBC News Online that, according to his staff, two of their ambulances had been shot at.
"By who? The probability is by US snipers," he said.
Asked whether these were warning or attacking shots, he said: "One was shot two or three times - a sniper does not shoot an ambulance three times by mistake."
British aid worker Jo Wilding said an ambulance she was in, with flashing lights, siren blaring and "ambulance" written on it in English, was hit as it drove to collect a woman in premature labour.
Ms Wilding is sure the shots came from American troops.
"You can tell the shape of US marine from a mujahideen - even if you can only see a silhouette, the helmet and flak jacket are quite distinctive. Also, we were in a US-controlled part of town," she told BBC News Online.
Iraqi doctor Salam al-Obaidi, a member of the Doctors for Iraq humanitarian society, worked in Falluja for six days during the fighting.
Speaking to BBC News Online, he described seeing colleagues blown up in an ambulance - also clearly marked - travelling in front of him as his team tried to enter a US-controlled area.
"I saw the ambulance disappear - not all of it, but the front of it, the side where the driver and paramedic were," he said.
Some homes were destroyed in the fighting
He said he and two more colleagues were injured in a second explosion. He still does not know the fate of the two people in the first ambulance.In a separate incident, Dr Obaidi said, a driver and paramedic in an ambulance were shot in a US-controlled area - one in the chest, the other in the eyes.
The injured civilians inside the ambulance bled to death during the next two days as warning shots were fired when the team tried - four times - to return to collect the ambulance, he said.
Meanwhile, the Marines may be attacking Faluja soon, but not until W himself gives the word:
AP reports that the US troops around Najaf have dug in for the long haul. It notes,
' Senior officers say the order to attack Najaf will be made "at the very highest levels of the U.S. government," an indication that President Bush may have the final word on whether soldiers here fight, or keep on waiting. '
Another reason for which the decision must be made by the President is the severe divisions in the US establishment in Iraq. Civil administrator Paul Bremer is said to have vehement and frequent disagreements with Gen. Rick Sanchez of CENTCOM.
There are also rumors that Bush himself made the decision that Fallujah would have to be massively punished for the desecration of the bodies of the US private soldiers of fortune killed there, and that Gen. John Abizaid strongly agreed.
That decision backfired badly from a political point of view, both in Iraq and the region, and the British in particular have signalled hard that it is time for the US to negotiate.
It’s a shame that US soldiers are being used as fodder to avenge the deaths of highly paid mercenaries who were in Iraq by choice.
Problems on the imperialistic front
Krugman on problems in Iraq:
Why was it predictable that Iraq would go wrong? The squandered victory in Afghanistan was an obvious precedent. But the character flaws in the Bush administration that led to the present crisis were fully visible in the months that followed 9/11.
It quickly became apparent that President Bush, while willing to spend vast sums on the military, wasn't willing to spend enough on security. And 9/11 didn't shake the administration's fanatical commitment to privatization and outsourcing, in which free-market ideology is inextricably mixed with eagerness to protect and reward corporate friends.
Sure enough, the administration was unprepared for predictable security problems in Iraq, but moved quickly — in violation of international law — to impose its economic vision. Last month Jay Garner, the first U.S. administrator of Iraq, told the BBC that he was sacked in part because he wanted to hold quick elections. His superiors wanted to privatize Iraqi industries first — as part of a plan that, according to Mr. Garner, was drawn up in late 2001.
Meanwhile, the administration handed out contracts without competitive bidding or even minimal oversight. It also systematically blocked proposals to have Congressional auditors oversee spending, or to impose severe penalties for fraud.
Cronyism and corruption are major factors in Iraq's downward spiral. This week the public radio program "Marketplace" is running a series titled "The Spoils of War," which documents a level of corruption in Iraq worse than even harsh critics had suspected. The waste of money, though it may run into the billions, is arguably the least of it — though military expenses are now $4.7 billion a month. The administration, true to form, is trying to hide the need for more money until after the election; Mr. Cordesman predicts that Iraq will need "in excess of $50-70 billion a year for probably two fiscal years."
More on corruption, waste, and mismanagement within the CPA can be found in Jason Vest’s enlightening description of a leaked CPA memo here.
Developing this theme, the memo asserts that the U.S. "share[s] culpability in the eyes of ordinary Iraqis" for engendering Iraq's currently cronyistic state; since "we appointed the Governing Council members . . . their corruption is our corruption." The author then notes that two individuals—names again redacted—have successfully worked to exclude certain strains of Shia from obtaining ministerial-level positions, and that for this "Iraqis blame Bremer, especially because the [CPA] Governance Group had assured Iraqis that exclusion from the Governing Council did not mean an exclusion from the process. As it turns out, we lied. People from Kut [a city south of Baghdad recently besieged by Shiite forces loyal to Muqtada al Sadr], for example, see that they have no representation on the Governing Council, and many predict civil war since they doubt that the Governing Council will really allow elections."
Fanning the embers of distrust is the U.S.'s failure to acknowledge that the constituencies of key Governing Council members "are not based on ideology, but rather on the muscle of their respective personal militias and the patronage which we allow them to bestow," according to the memo's author. Using the Kurds as an example, he reveals that "we have bestowed approximately $600 million upon the Kurdish leadership, in addition to the salaries we pay, in addition to the USAID projects, in addition to the taxes which we have allowed them to collect illegally." To underscore the point, the author adds that he recently spent an evening with a Kurdish contact watching The Godfather trilogy, and notes that "the entire evening was spent discussing which Iraqi Kurdish politicians represented which [Godfather] character."
And here’s the text of the actual memo.
Book Store Trip Leads To Huge Erection
I’m assuming that’s what the Tribune’s headline would have been had the perp been looking at porn at Barnes and Noble, but since he used that newfangled Internet thingy to enable his predatory behavior, the Trib had to settle for this headline instead:
Internet Connection Leads To Sex Charges
Free speech trumps Pentagon rules
 |
This picture got a civilian cargo worker fired.
A military contractor fired two cargo workers responsible for a photograph of flag-draped coffins of U.S. soldiers that appeared on a newspaper's front page.
Maytag Aircraft Corp. fired Tami Silicio, 50, and her husband, David Landry, because they ''violated Department of Defense and company policies by working together'' to take and publish the photograph, company president William Silva said in a news release Thursday.
The firing was first reported Thursday in The Seattle Times, which published the April 7 photo on Sunday.
But now, after a Freedom of Information Act request by thememoryhole.org, similar pictures are flooding the Internet, and soon, I’m sure, newspapers everywhere.
The Pentagon lost its tight control over the images of coffins returning from Iraq as about 350 such images were released under the Freedom of Information Act and a Seattle newspaper published a similar photo taken by a military contractor.
After Dover Air Force Base, the main port for returning remains, released hundreds of government photos of the ceremonies, the Defense Department ordered yesterday that no more photographs be released. In addition, two employees for defense contractor Maytag Aircraft were fired after the Pentagon complained about a photo of flag-draped caskets taken by one of them that appeared in the Seattle Times.
In March 2003, on the eve of war in Iraq, the Pentagon ordered an end to all media coverage of ceremonies for the returning remains of soldiers killed overseas. Although Dover already had such a policy, the Pentagon action enforced a military-wide ban on images of flag-draped caskets that dated to late 2000 but had not been followed.
With few exceptions, the ban had remained in force until recent days. But last week, about 350 photos from Dover were released under a Freedom of Information Act request by Russ Kick, a First Amendment advocate who runs a Web site called the Memory Hole (www.thememoryhole.org). Dover recommended that Kick's request be denied, but officials at Air Mobility Command headquarters at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois authorized the release on appeal. After Kick posted the photos, they appeared on other Web sites, including the Drudge Report.
The sudden spread yesterday of the Dover photos of flag-draped caskets returning from Iraq came a day after Tami Silicio and her husband and co-worker, David Landry, were fired for the photo she took at Kuwait International Airport of caskets in an aircraft. The photo was published Sunday on the front page of the Seattle Times.
"We have terminated two employees in Kuwait who violated Department of Defense and company policy by working together to photograph and publish the flag-draped caskets of our servicemen and women being returned to the United States," said William Silva, president of Maytag Aircraft, the Colorado Springs-based military contractor that employed Silicio and her husband.
......Although photographs of flag-draped caskets returning from overseas fighting were common in the 1980s and 1990s, the Bush administration has enforced the ban on such images, saying it reflects families' wishes. Critics of the policy said the administration is trying to airbrush the realities of war.
Bush Bros. specialty: Mendacious Misrepresentations
From Florida Politics:
Presidential candidate John Kerry nearly slipped on oil Wednesday when Gov. Jeb Bush took the words of a student reporter and used them to accuse the Massachusetts senator of favoring oil drilling off Florida's coast.
If it had been true it could have been as devastating to Kerry's chances of winning Florida as threatening to end Social Security. But Kerry's campaign insisted that the Independent Florida Alligator made an "honest mistake" and that Kerry is a staunch opponent of drilling off Florida's shores.
But that didn't stop Bush, who waved a copy of the student-run newspaper in front of reporters in Tallahassee Wednesday and said he couldn't believe that no one else had reported it.
Hog pork riders squeal excitedly over State funds
Priorities: the Republicans in Talahassee who can’t find funds for health care for the needy have managed to dig up $1 million for their weekend Harley-riding buddies:
A group that lobbied for the controversial repeal of helmet laws in Florida and now counts more than a dozen current and former legislators as members would receive a $1 million-a-year no- bid state contract under proposals racing through both legislative chambers.
ABATE of Florida, a 6,000- member motorcycle advocacy group, would be required to use the money for safety awareness, education and research. It would be more money than the state gives the Transportation Department and Florida Highway Patrol for all of their traffic safety awareness programs combined.
Tucking the allocation into Senate Bill 682 was state Sen. Nancy Argenziano, R-Dunnellon, who occasionally rides with the group's president and chief lobbyist, James ``Doc'' Reichenbach II.
``This is extremely important to me,'' said Argenziano, a lifetime-member of ABATE and part of a loose-knit group of motorcycle-riding lawmakers calling themselves the ``Biker Caucus.''
......State officials who typically handle highway safety programs chafed at the proposal, arguing ABATE wages a misleading campaign against the lifesaving benefits of helmets.
``Certainly ABATE would be getting a lot more money than anyone else, and it would be for a negative, untruthful message,'' said Carla Sims, traffic safety administrator for the Department of Transportation Safety Office, which receives no state money for its billboard and television highway safety messages.
Ken Howes, Deputy Director of the Florida Highway Patrol, said his department relies on its Web site and the goodwill of cable operators to distribute its public safety messages for free because of a lack of funding.
Referring to the prospect of a $1 million-a-year deal for ABATE, Howes said, ``That kind of stuff should be coming from the Department of Transportation safety office.''
......No Competitive Bidding
Neither he nor Argenziano had concerns that the contract for the awareness program was not subject to competitive bidding.
``Maybe that's something we can do in the future, once the program is in place,'' Argenziano said.
Reichenbach said he objected to competitive bidding because ``nobody else is doing this.'' The Department of Transportation disputes that assertion.
``We allocate $275,000 to motorcycle safety programs every year'' using federal money, said the Department of Transportation's Sims.
But Reichenbach rejected criticism from the department and the highway patrol.
``They could have done the same thing and didn't do it. All you have to do is put in an amendment. Everyone knows the process,'' Reichenbach said. ``There is so much pork in these budgets. This is just another excuse to boink the bikers.''
Hmmm... everyone knows the process. Why, I can’t believe how stupid the DOT is. All they had to do is put in an amendment and they could have had their own million dollars. Stupid governmental agency. /sarcasm>
Fuck this shit: the FCC is going too far
The fundamentalist culture warriors are at it again. This is downright silly, but the scarey part is that Michael Powell may well take it seriously.
Looks like the S-word might be the next profanity in the sites of indecency foes.
Attorney John Thompson, whose complaints about Howard Stern helped prompt Clear Channel to banish the jock and the FCC to fine the company almost half a million dollars, says he has faxed a complaint to the FCC about Sunday night's 60 Minutes broadcast, in which singer Mary J. Blige uttered an under-her-breath "shit."
According to Thomson, he sent the complaint yesterday to FCC Chairman Michael Powell and his senior legal adviser. He did not contact CBS or 60 Minutes and neither had any comment. One CBS spokesperson confirmed the word had aired, though another expressed some doubt.
Thompson was alerted by a piece on The Schnitt Show on Clear Channel's WIOD(AM) Miami.
A check of the show's Web site (www.schnittshow.com) provided an audio clip of the Blige expletive underneath this caption: "Mary J. Blige cursing during 60 minutes, will Viacom be nailed by the FCC for this?"
While Clear Channel yanked Stern, saying it was indecent, Viacom did not and Monday asked the FCC to reconsider its decision making swear words actionable regardless of context.
Thompson in his complaint said: "This constitutes a violation of FCC-enforced decency standards, just a surely as does Bono
Bullshit. TV should not have to be dumbed down to to a 5 year old's level. 60 minutes is a serious news show. It is not a kid's show. It is not a cartoon aimed at children. It is a show aimed at adults, and an occasional unintentional possible utterance of the word "shit" is not going to harm anyone.
Clear Channel is carrying water for the Bush administration. They were huge cheerleaders of his illegal invasion, and they do his bidding by yanking Howard Stern’s show off the air. Do we really need to spend time and resources censoring mainstream television just to avoid having to talk to our children about the English language?
If you are worried about what your kids are watching on TV, then supervise them. But don’t shelter them too much, else they might grow up to be over-sensitive self-important histrionic hacks seeking puritanical control over the prurience of the proles.