Open thread

I spoke on a panel at a state legislators' conference with Pam Spaulding and Jane Hamsher today. We then went to a nice little cocktail party Joe Sudbay hosted for Pam at his place. Was really a nice gathering, and it included a number of interesting people, including David Phillips, one of the men who says that he slept with Larry Craig. While at the party, I interviewed David for a podcast that I'll be publishing later on Monday (if you subscribe to my podcast via iTunes you'll be getting it automatically in a short while). Read More......

New Aussie government says rich and poor need to address climate change

Absolutely. While traveling in Egypt last summer this exact subject was often raised with many Westerners giving a free pass to poor countries on climate change. The argument that I often heard was that countries such as Egypt don't have any money so the rich nations ought to be paying for everything and leading this. I completely agree that the rich nations could do a heck of a lot more to help poor countries face this issue, it's a flimsy excuse and I don't buy in to the theory of helplessness.

While traveling through Sinai, I was disgusted with the uncontrolled growth that led to rubbish everywhere including in the Sea of Aqaba. Tourists who go to Sinai primarily go to see the magic underwater, which could be beautiful and also horribly disappointing. Wealthy developers from Cairo are taking in money, hand over fist but I doubt the high times will last very long considering the complete disrespect for Mother Nature. Who will pay good money to see trashed coral and a fish graveyard? I am familiar enough with the financial dynamics of such economies and refuse to accept that they can't afford to take action. They can't afford not to take action.

Hiring people to promote cleaner tourism and picking up rubbish is a very small price to pay in a place such as Sinai. For a dollar or two per day, you can hire someone who will gladly jump on the opportunity for employment. The problem is that the wealthy developers who will be gone tomorrow, sitting on the weatlth that they collected, have no interest in tomorrow. They always have friendly political connections and moan about how they can't afford any such investment but this argument is the same kind of greed that we hear from business in the US who supposedly can't afford regulation.

Can the rich nations help? Of course and they should. They could educate, provide startup funding to launch programs, lobby governments who are receiving funds and much more, but to say the poor nations are helpless in this struggle is false. Maybe our next government will be more creative with diplomacy and get such programs moving. Hats off to the new Austalian government for speaking out and suggesting that all countries, rich and poor, are active participants. It is empowering and a more progressive approach compared to what we have today. All of us can make a difference in one way or another. Read More......

Generation transition problems in the UK

Issues related to the baby boomers have become a really hot topic amongst many I know so this story really jumped out for me. Increasingly I hear so much grumbling about the baby boomers and their "it's all about me" attitudes. Part of this reaction is fatigue over a generation that ran the show for years and part is perhaps related to the steady stream of bashing of the younger generation. Another part is no doubt related to the apparent disregard of young kids who are coming in to the work force.

For years we all heard about the staggering retirement costs related to the Boomers but in the last year we hear much more about the work attitudes of the Boomers compared to the younger workers. The UK, probably like the US, is facing a problem with a substantial percentage of school principals heading into retirement. That alone is not necessarily a problem, but the younger generations are showing little interest in taking on the stresses/risks of management. They would just assume make a little bit less money and enjoy time with friends and family.

All of this is connected and surely is a reaction to what many of us saw growing up. How many kids under 30 (and younger than the Boomers) saw parents lose all job security? How many saw parents/family pursue higher positions only to be tossed aside with the first sign of trouble. As much as Boomers like to argue that young kids are just lazy, I simply don't buy it. It's obvious to me that we are in a testing period where employers and employees are trying to figure out the dynamics of the future.

Maybe young workers will have to give a little (leaving home, for example) but I also think that they are forcing employers to update and adjust. More young workers want a clearer division between work and life and they are not going to be intertwined as we saw with the Boomers. This is a healthy change, in my opinion. It's a different world today and that means adjustments are necessary. If the best employers can offer is job insecurity, fewer benefits and pushing workers upwards to their own level of self-incompetence, something needs to give. More power to the youth who are forcing change. Just because the Boomers don't like it or it doesn't fit with their model of life, doesn't mean it's wrong. Read More......

In those destroyed tapes, the CIA was torturing someone they knew was low-level and seriously mentally ill

In the excellent book, "The One Percent Doctrine," author Ron Suskind gave us the background on Abu Zubaydah, the guy the CIA was torturing in those now destroyed tapes. Here's how the Washington Post's review of Suskind's book describes him:

Abu Zubaydah, his captors discovered, turned out to be mentally ill and nothing like the pivotal figure they supposed him to be. CIA and FBI analysts, poring over a diary he kept for more than a decade, found entries "in the voice of three people: Hani 1, Hani 2, and Hani 3" -- a boy, a young man and a middle-aged alter ego. All three recorded in numbing detail "what people ate, or wore, or trifling things they said." Dan Coleman, then the FBI's top al-Qaeda analyst, told a senior bureau official, "This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality."

Abu Zubaydah also appeared to know nothing about terrorist operations; rather, he was al-Qaeda's go-to guy for minor logistics -- travel for wives and children and the like. That judgment was "echoed at the top of CIA and was, of course, briefed to the President and Vice President," Suskind writes. And yet somehow, in a speech delivered two weeks later, President Bush portrayed Abu Zubaydah as "one of the top operatives plotting and planning death and destruction on the United States." And over the months to come, under White House and Justice Department direction, the CIA would make him its first test subject for harsh interrogation techniques.

Read More......

Did Bush approve CIA leak to embarrass Pelosi?

Sure looks that way. Today's Washington Post reports that Pelosi was briefed about the CIA's waterboarding in 2002 and raised no objections. A few responses:

It's pretty clear that either one of the Republican members of Congress at the meeting, or the CIA, decided to leak what happened at a super-classified post-9/11 briefing in order to embarrass Pelosi and the Democrats. And I don't doubt for a minute that Bush approved the leak, as he always does.

It's also clear that had Pelosi raised any private objections during the meeting - remember, it took place in the first year after September 11 - Bush and the Republicans would have leaked that fact to the public (like they just did) and destroyed her career and marked her publicly as a traitor. No member of Congress, no American, could have spoken up about anything in the months after September 11 and survived. It's patently unfair to suggest that somehow because Pelosi didn't object then that she doesn't have the right to object now.

One final point. I hope this teaches Pelosi and Reid and all the Democrats that no matter what you do, this administration will mark you as a traitor and try to do destroy you. You might as well fight back and try to win, because if you don't, you'll sit back and lose. Read More......

Sunday Talk Shows Open Thread

Four presidential candidates do the shows total. The usual ratio of three GOPers to one Democrat. Seems like Clinton and Obama are getting enough coverage this weekend. Clinton brought out her whole family including Chelsea. Oprah's Obama tour is rolling into South Carolina and New Hampshire. Who needs Russert or Scheiffer when you've got Oprah?

Now, the Rudy interview could be good -- if Russert actually asks the right questions and demands answers. That's unlikely, of course.

Here's the lineup:

ABC's "This Week" — Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.; actor John Cusack.

___

CBS' "Face the Nation" — Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb.

___

NBC's "Meet the Press" — Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

___

CNN's "Late Edition" — Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf; Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio.

"Fox News Sunday" _ Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Have at it. Read More......

Open thread

We went out to a Christmas party in the burbs tonight. In Washington, DC, the Virginia suburbs might as well be California - no one likes leaving their neighborhood in this town, even if it is just a ten to fifteen minute drive. The nice thing about driving into Virginia is the view. It really is wonderful, driving along the Potomac, past the Kennedy Center, the Lincoln Memorial, and then the bridge into Virginia (then past the Pentagon or the Iwo Jima Memorial, depending where you're heading). This time we did the Pentagon route, which led us past the relatively-new Air Force Memorial, which is actually nice. (I hate the WWII memorial, it's a gaudy hideous eyesore smack dab in the middle of what was once a between plain between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial.) Anyway, the Air Force memorial is nice.



And driving by the Lincoln Memorial never gets old.

Read More......