Hullabaloo

Monday, November 21, 2011

 
Moral High Ground

by David Atkins

The United States is truly leading the free world:

Two people were killed in Cairo and Alexandria this weekend as Egyptian activists took the streets to protest the military's attempts to maintain its grip on power. And guess how the state is justifying its deadly crackdown.

"We saw the firm stance the US took against OWS people & the German govt against green protesters to secure the state," an Egyptian state television anchor said yesterday...

Yeah—it gets harder and harder to maintain a moral high ground when videos like this and pictures like this are unavoidable.

How bad are things in Egypt? Pretty bad:

Reporting from Cairo—
Egypt is frayed, bloody and slipping toward a new revolt.

The clashes that erupted for the second day in a row Sunday between police and protesters are the most volatile challenge in months to the nation's military leaders. The anger glimpsed through the tear gas and on the bruised faces of demonstrators marked a dangerous chasm between the Egyptian people and the generals who have refused to relinquish power to a civilian government.

What is unfolding in the streets of Cairo, Suez and the coastal city of Alexandria is the compounded anger over the unrealized promise of a revolution that ousted Hosni Mubarak in February but has yet to steer the country toward a new democracy. Five people have been killed across the nation, including three Sunday in Cairo's Tahrir Square, and more than 1,000 have been injured since violence broke out on Saturday.

Security forces and military police, swinging batons, firing birdshot and driving armored personnel carriers, stormed the square late Sunday afternoon, chasing out protesters and burning tents. The troops quickly retreated and growing ranks of demonstrators returned to the area, yelling epithets against the military as darkness fell. Protesters numbered as many as 20,000 before midnight.

And the Egyptian police state authorities are using the American crackdown to legitimate protests as their justification.

I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free.

.
thereisnospoon 11/21/2011 07:30:00 AM |

Sunday, November 20, 2011

 

Setting the terms

by digby

If you want to see how it's done, watch Jon Kyl set the terms of the debate:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Gregory: Secretary Panetta has said the following about the impact of that. sequester, he said, which is the process by which those automatic triggers go into place, will lead to a hollow force that in effect invites aggression. He also said in a letter to senator Mccain of armed services, the impact of these cuts would be devastating for the department of defense. as a result we would have to forumlate a new security strategy that accepted substantial risk of not meeting our defense needs. would you support a workaround of some measure that would not -- that would prevent the automatic tax cuts from going into place. excuse me, automatic lick spending cuts.

Kyl: what people should know is that one way or another we're going to have $1.2 trillion in reduced spending. it could either be done the ugly way, which would happen if our committee fails. or we could do it more intelligently. but we do have the opportunity, even if the committee fails, to work around the sequester so that we still have $1.2 trillion in savings over ten years. but it's not done in the very draconian way that secretary panetta is referring to. now that will require work on congress' part, and some agreement. but i can't imagine that, knowing of the importance of national defense, that both democrats and republicans wouldn't find a way to work through that process so way still get to $1.2 trillion in cuts, but it doesn't all fall on defense as secretary panetta pointed out.

Gregory: so you don't think the defense cuts will happen?

Kyl: well, i think there's a way to avoid that, if there's goodwill on both sides. again, i think when the reality sets in and even those democratic friends who would like to see more defense cuts, when people like secretary panetta says this would be extraordinarily bad policy for the national security of the united states, we'll find ways to work around that.

Gregory: do you feel some urgency to get this done? what about the potential of another downgrade of america's debt?

Kyl: again there's going to be $1.2 trillion in savings, whether the committee agrees on a method of doing it or it happens automatically, as you say. this shouldn't foster a downgrade or run on the market or anything like that. $1.2 trillion in savings occurs one way or the other.

Note Kyl's language: he never says 1.2 trillion in deficit reduction. He says, "cuts", "savings", "reduced spending." No taxes or revenue of any kind. He's simply asserting that this is about discretionary and mandatory domestic spending cuts, period. And that trigger obviously means nothing.

Then, you had John Kerry on right afterwards saying that the Democrats were more than willing to take a meat ax to the budget as well but they really, kind of, wanted some revenue too. It doesn't look like they are going to get even that (thank God.) But the terms of the election year debate are all going to be about how the Democrats are insisting on raising taxes. After all, the only spending cuts that are controversial anymore are the defense cuts --- which Democrats will never fight for.

In fact, the Republicans will be able to say quite honestly in their campaign ads that the Democrats want to cut social security and medicare and raise taxes.

Those are all very popular stands with the public.

.

digby 11/20/2011 06:30:00 PM |

 
Virtually Speaking Sunday

by digby

It's a good pair for this week. Civil liberties and Supercommittee extravaganza:

9 pm eastern | 6 pm pacific |McJoan is back with emptywheel.

Joan McCarter and Marcy Wheeler discuss developments of the week, highlighting issues neglected or misrepresented on the Sunday morning broadcasts, drawing from their work of the prior week and the wickedly funny Bobblespeak Translations. Worth tuning in for Culture of Truth on the Most Outrageous Moment from the Sunday morning talk shows. Follow @JoanMcCarter @emptywheel.

Listen live and later on BTR

.

digby 11/20/2011 05:45:00 PM |

 
Sweet 'phobe Alabama

by digby

The good news is that Alabama is equal opportunity xenophobic. The bad news is that they aren't really supposed to be:

A German manager with Mercedes-Benz is free after being arrested for not having a driver's license with him under Alabama's new law targeting illegal immigrants, authorities said Friday, in an otherwise routine case that drew the attention of Gov. Robert Bentley.

Tuscaloosa Police Chief Steven Anderson told The Associated Press an officer stopped a rental vehicle for not having a tag Wednesday night and asked the driver for his license. The man only had a German identification card, so he was arrested and taken to police headquarters, Anderson said.

The 46-year-old executive was charged with violating the immigration law for not having proper identification, but he was released after an associate retrieved his passport, visa and German driver's license from the hotel where he was staying, Anderson said.

The length of his detainment and the status of his court case weren't immediately known.

Mercedes-Benz, which is a division of Daimler AG, builds sport-utility vehicles at a large plant in Vance, about 20 miles east of Tuscaloosa. The automaker's decision to open a factory in Alabama in 1993 was considered a major coup for the state's economic development efforts and launched a trend of other foreign automakers and suppliers who opened major factories in the state, including Honda, Toyota and Hyundai.

Bentley, a Republican who signed the illegal immigration law earlier this year, called the state's homeland security director, Spencer Collier, after hearing of the arrest to get details about had happened, Collier said in an interview.
[...]
The law — parts of which were put on hold amid legal challenges — requires that police check citizenship status during traffic stops and take anyone who doesn't have proper identification to a magistrate. Anderson said that's what was done, but someone in the same situation wouldn't have been arrested before the law took effect.

"If it were not for the immigration law, a person without a license in their possession wouldn't be arrested like this," he said. Previously, drivers who lacked licenses received a ticket and a court summons, the police chief said.

Mexico issued a travel warning to its citizens thinking of visiting Arizona after it passed its draconian immigration law. Maybe European countries should think about doing that for Alabama. It's clearly a dangerous place to be a foreigner --- even if your employer provides thousands of jobs to the locals. But surely they never meant for it to impact a nice German man. (And somehow I really doubt that the GOP leadership and the Governor's office normally gets involved in these things.)

Meanwhile, I continue to be surprised to learn that individual states have created "homeland security" departments. Why do they need such a thing on top of their state and local police departments, various Federal DHS agencies plus the FBI? Alabama's DHS web site explains:

The Alabama Department of Homeland Security (AL DHS) was established by an act of the Alabama State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Bob Riley on June 18, 2003. Alabama is the first state in the Nation to create its own legislatively enacted Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security. The head of AL DHS is Director Spencer Collier.

Alabama’s Homeland Security Department is staffed and organized to mirror the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The Alabama Department of Homeland Security is divided into four major functional areas including: Borders, Ports and Transportation; Science and Technology; Information Management and Budget; and Emergency Preparedness and Response.

The mission of the AL DHS is to work with our federal, state, and local partners to prevent acts of terrorism in Alabama, to protect lives and safeguard property, and if required, to respond to any acts of terrorism occurring in Alabama. To accomplish this mission, the Alabama Department of Homeland Security works closely with both public and private sector stakeholders in a wide range of disciplines: law enforcement, emergency management, emergency medical, fire services, public works, agriculture, public health, public safety communications, environmental management, military, transportation, and more.

Since its inception, the Alabama Department of Homeland Security has administered, throughout Alabama, over $100 million in federally appropriated homeland security grants.

Well, there you have it. A brand spanking new police agency with an incredibly broad mandate and a whole lot of money. What's not to like?

Update: I guess I'm the last to know, but Mr Google tells me that dozens of states have "Departments of Homeland Security" and they and other public safety departments are recipients of many millions of DHS grants to "fight terrorism." I knew, of course, that vast amounts of federal money was flowing to state and municipal police agencies in the wake of 9/11 but I did not realize that states were explicitly replicating the federal DHS at the state level. I guess you just can't have too many redundant policing agencies.


.

digby 11/20/2011 04:30:00 PM |

 
Progressive Caucus Recertified

by David Atkins

There was a significant hubbub caused when the California Democratic Party delayed recertifying its Progressive Caucus (of which I am a member, though I wasn't present to vote on the resolution in question) after it passed a resolution encouraging a primary challenge to Barack Obama.

Much of the progressive blogosphere freaked out about this, claiming that the Party was attempting to quell dissent and expel anyone who stepped out of line. In truth, the delay in recertification at the last CDP executive board meeting in Anaheim took place in order to avoid an ugly and bruising floor fight that might have resulted in the decertification of the aucus, particularly at the hands of angry minority groups (whose constituents still strongly support the President) including the African-American Caucus.

The delay in recertification was the right move at the time, as I have said in the past. It allowed cooler heads to prevail and for rifts to be at least partially mended. And today at the CDP Executive Board meeting in Burlingame, I was proud to be among the board members to vote to recertify the Progressive Caucus in the California Democratic Party.

In any organization particularly on the Left, you'll mostly find good people usually trying through fits and starts to do the right thing. Processes often get corrupted and bad leaders can do extraordinary damage sometimes, but by and large these are real people in these organizations, giving hundreds of hours of their time for free for a cause. The CDP has been doing a fantastic job of late as one of most progressive and effective Democratic organizations in the country, and the handling of the Progressive Caucus business has been no exception.


.
thereisnospoon 11/20/2011 03:00:00 PM |

 
Libertarian patriarchy

by digby

I've been given to understand that Ron Paul really does believe that the half of the population that manages to get by without a penis is entitled to liberty just as the one's who are lucky to have them. I have been skeptical of this position since he also believes that women don't have the freedom to control their own bodies and has long history of associating with Christian Reconstructionists.

I think he may have clarified his position once and for all at the Thanksgiving Family Forum:

Ron Paul (at 15:22): “Matter of fact, when the people came to Samuel and said, “Look, we need more rules and more laws. We want more government to tell us what to do and we — we need more of this.” And Samuel was old and ready to retire and he says, “No, that’s a bad mistake. You don’t need more rules and more government. You don’t need this — the government will overreact.”

And today this is what I think has happened to us. We have deferred to.. to the federal government. We have weighed too much government. We should go in other directions. Before you know it the next step — what if the next step is, “Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the United Nations defined marriage?”

I don’t want to go that way, I want to go back down… all the way to the family and the Church — believe me it would be a happier and more peaceful world if we went in that direction, rather than asking the government and asking the King to solve all these problems… we need the family to deal with it.

And we can take our message and learn something from the Old Testament, how there was such a strong emphasis on the Patriarchal society and the disputes settled by judges rather than looking for Big Government.”

Those really were the good old days.

.
digby 11/20/2011 01:30:00 PM |

 

Polar Occupation

by digby

I'm fairly sure this is the northernmost Occupation in the world:

Saturday marks the two-month anniversary for the Occupy Fairbanks movement. Instead of the police crackdowns seen elsewhere around the country, the Interior Alaska protesters are contending with punishing cold and local grumbling about the legality of warm-up tents.

Brent Baccala, a 41-year-old self-described preacher and software designer from Maryland, continued his vigil at Veterans Memorial Park sporting a donated Northern Outfitters blue suit and matching boots Friday. He slept in the nearby tent as overnight temperature dropped to minus 36, Thursday, three degrees cooler than the record low for that date, set in 1969. It was the second time this week area temperatures set new daily lows, according to the National Weather Service.

Baccala, who's been in Fairbanks two weeks, said he felt a religious calling to join the movement while reading about Occupy Fairbanks in Juneau, where he'd been preaching to tourists. People should live the Christian life of "giving, forgiveness and generosity," he said Friday. "My focus is the immorality of capitalism."

John Watts, 50, had ice forming on his mustache Friday as he explained his motives for supporting Occupy Fairbanks.

"Elements of the tea party are connecting with the thinkers," he said. "Something is wrong. Media wants to set it up to look like the solution is either we are free or not free, the far left side or far right."

Baccala and other protesters contend the First Amendment's protection for free speech implies a right to stay warm in the process. The Fairbanks North Star Borough, which maintains that protesters are squatting on downtown space, prohibits camping in its parks, except specific camping sites.

I went to school there and believe me, that's cold. It's also brave. Fairbanks is the home of Tea Party senate candidate Joe Miller and his gun-toting fans. (He was once the attorney for the North Star Borough, where he famously conspired with Sarah Palin.)

.

digby 11/20/2011 12:30:00 PM |

 
Biggest applause of the night

by digby

All of the occupy movements start with the premise that we all owe them everything. The take over a public park they didn't pay for; To go nearby to go to bathrooms they didn't pay for; to beg for food from places they didn't pay for; to instruct those who go to work to pay the taxes to sustain the bathrooms and to sustain the park, so they can self-righteously proclaim that they are the paragons of virtue for which we owe everything.

Now that is a pretty good symptom of how much the left has collapsed as a moral system in this country and why you need to assert something as simple as saying to them, "Go get a job right after you take a bath."

This debate took place in a church, by the way.

Update: This moment was my personal favorite.



I guess she knows her people too.

.

digby 11/20/2011 11:00:00 AM |

 
Silent Shame

by digby

I have to give the students at UC Davis a big round of applause. Not only did they show tremendous restraint and maturity in enduring that pepper spray assault, they skillfully organized the most effective possible response:

A pretty remarkable thing just happened. A press conference, scheduled for *4:00pm* between the UC Davis Chancellor and police with local press on campus, did not end in an hour, as planned. Instead, a mass of Occupy Davis students and sympathizers mobilized outside, demanding to have their voice heard. After some initial confusion, UC Chancellor Linda Katehi refused to leave the building, attempting to give the media the impression that the students were somehow holding her hostage.

A group of highly organized students formed a large gap for the chancellor to leave. They chanted “we are peaceful” and “just walk home,” but nothing changed for several hours. Eventually student representatives convinced the chancellor to leave after telling their fellow students to sit down and lock arms (around 7:00pm).

ME: Chancellor, do you still feel threatened by the students?

KATEHI: No. No.

Non-violent civil disobedience is very, very difficult and takes a great deal of time and commitment. But it's potent. It was organized by one of the pepper spray victims.





.
digby 11/20/2011 09:30:00 AM |

 
Pepper Spray Friday

by David Atkins

The Occupy Movement isn't the only situation in which potentially troublesome individuals camp out in public or semi-public spaces overnight. In fact, it happens every year with increasingly dangerous consequences. The toll of Black Friday already includes several deaths by trampling of unruly mobs, shootings of crazed shoppers, multiple cases of paralysis, pregnancy complications including miscarriage, and a variety of other violence.

That is 100% more death, paralysis, miscarriage, shooting and violence than the entirety of the Occupy Movement is responsible for.

But something tells me that we won't be about to see police officers standing in front of Black Friday protesters, using tear gas on the crowds while "fearing for their safety."

That's because free speech isn't sacred in America. As George Bush proved shortly after the 9/11 attacks, consumerism is America's religion. Peacefully speaking out against the financial sector will be met with police in riot gear and debilitating "compliance devices," but violent mobs of shoppers are free to trample one another on the holy altar of profit.

As Milton Friedman famously said:

The characteristic feature of action through political channels is that it tends to require or enforce substantial conformity. The great advantage of the market, on the other hand, is that it permits wide diversity. It is, in political terms, a system of proportional representation. Each man can vote, as it were, for the color of tie he wants and get it; he does not have to see what color-the majority wants and then, if he is in the minority, submit.

The non-conformity of Black Friday at WalMart is true diversity and democracy, even on pain of death. The conformist fascist protesters in New York and and elsewhere must be met with pepper spray and the full force of America-loving riot police, lest the nation itself be hurt by questioning the "free" market.


.
thereisnospoon 11/20/2011 07:30:00 AM |

Saturday, November 19, 2011

 
Saturday Night at the Movies

Dirty words and punky dads

By Dennis Hartley

%*@#!! : The Weird World of Blowfly

Before you can begin to process the paradoxical nature of cult rapper Clarence “Blowfly” Reid, you have to understand that “he” (as, in the singular) is actually a duo. Do I mean that he has a split personality? Not necessarily; after all, in the music business, it’s not unusual for some artists to disappear behind an alter ego (Screamin’ Jay Hawkins, Alice Cooper, Marilyn Manson) or to “reinvent” themselves on a semi-annual basis (David Bowie, Madonna, Prince), but there aren’t many whose careers can be divided into such mutually exclusive halves as Reid’s. First, there is Clarence Reid, the recording artist whose 1965 recording of “The Dirty Rap” is considered by some musicologists to be the first rap song. He made a few R&B albums through the late 60s; then wrote and produced hits for Betty Wright (“Clean-up Woman”), Gwen Macrae, KC & the Sunshine Band and others during his tenure with the Miami-based TK records through the mid-70s. Then, there is “Blowfly”, a nickname assigned to him as a teenager by his grandmother, who, chagrinned by his tendency to amuse himself and his friends by singing his own “dirtied up” versions of Top 40 hits, allegedly proclaimed Clarence to be “nastier than a blowfly”.

In 1970, an odd metamorphosis took place, beginning with an album called “The Weird World of Blowfly”. It was in fact so “weird” (and nasty) that Reid had to create his own independent label (Weird World), in order to release it in its unexpurgated glory (possibly inspired by Frank Zappa’s Bizarre Records label, which had been created a couple years before). Most of the songs were parodies; with titles like “Spermy Night in Georgia” and “Shittin’ on the Dock of the Bay”. Needless to say, this Weird Al Yankovic meets Rudy Ray Moore persona was the antithesis of the artist formerly known as Clarence Reid, who had been a bit more radio-friendly. The LP was a hit with the “party record” set, as were many subsequent releases throughout the 80s and 90s. Thus, “Blowfly” was born; lewd, crude, and bedecked like a Mexican wrestler. So (some may wonder)…where is he now?

Inquiring minds may want to check out a new documentary called The Weird World of Blowfly (released simultaneously this week in theaters and on DVD), which brings you up to snuff. That is not to say that you will necessarily like everything you learn. Jonathan Furmanski’s film (a sometimes disconcerting cross between This Is Spinal Tap and The Elephant Man) doesn’t pull any punches, particularly concerning the less savory aspects of This Business We Call “Show”. Furmanski follows Blowfly and his backup band on a loosely organized “world tour” (for want of a better term) over a period of two years. Pushing 70 (at the time of filming) and suffering from a bum knee, the road-weary Reid is shuffled from gig to gig by his doughy drummer/manager, Tom Bowker. Bowker, a professed super-fan (and so-so drummer), appears to have Reid’s best interests at heart, but at times he emits a whiff of Eau de Colonel Parker. In one scene, Bowker harangues Reid in an uncomfortably disrespectful manner. Then again, Blowfly has several bizarre on-camera meltdowns himself. He throws a backstage hissy fit, going apoplectic after Bowker sets his boxed pizza on a chair (“…where people put their dirty asses?!”). And his racist diatribe about African-Americans is a definite eyebrow-raiser.

Obvious freak show aspects of the film aside, there are a few genuine surprises. Reid pays a visit to his mother, where he pulls out a dog-eared Bible and talks about his devout Christian faith. Shooting down another stereotype about hard-partying musicians on the road, it also turns out that Reid has always eschewed drugs and alcohol. Whatever demons lurk in his soul are apparently purged whenever he puts on his mask and cape and takes to the stage (maybe there is a lesson somewhere in there for all of us, nu?). Reid does show himself to still be a solid trouper in performance, whether its playing to five people in a stateside dive bar (the film’s most Spinal Tap moment) or to a concert hall audience in Dresden, where he opens for Die Artze, one of Germany’s top punk bands (although most of the young audience seems stunned into silent bewilderment).

One gathers the impression that Blowfly’s biggest fans these days are fellow musicians; his influence has eclipsed his actual popularity, as it were. A gushing Ice-T, Chuck D., Die Artze’s Farin Urlaub and Jello Biafra would seem to accentuate this point (Biafra joins Blowfly onstage for one of the performance highlights, an exquisitely tasteless cover of The Dead Kennedys’ “Holiday in Cambodia” re-entitled “R. Kelly in Cambodia”). Love Blowfly or hate him, there’s still something to be said for anyone who does his or her part to make the censors twitch. I picture Frank Zappa up there, with a guitar in one hand and a rolled-up copy of the First Amendment in the other, smiling.

Dad, you’re totally embarrassing me: The Other F Word

I could easily go the rest of my life without having one more person say this to me: “Having a kid completely changes your life.” Yeah, yeah, whatever. Bully for you, you’ve reproduced. Happy for ya, Mazel Tov. Congrats. Love to stay and chat longer, but I simply must get back to the Arctic desolation of my studio apartment and resume brooding about a life tragically misspent (thanks for the reminder). Busy schedule, things to do. Check ya later. But enough about me. I’ve resigned to the fact that if I’m still a confirmed bachelor at 55, I’m obviously too narcissistic to have children. Or something.

But you know what? Having a kid completely changes your life, even if you are a punk rocker. Just ask Flea, Tony Adolescent, Mark Hoppus, Rob Chaos or Jim Lindberg. Those are a few of the interviewees in an engagingly candid and unexpectedly touching documentary about punk rock dads called The Other F Word, directed by Andrea Blaugrund Nevins. Nevins follows her subjects on the road, on stage and at home with their families, then does an admirably deft job of tying all the incongruities together.

Jim Lindberg (lead singer of the venerable skatepunk outfit Pennywise) gets a lion’s share of the camera time. Astutely and entertainingly self-aware, Lindberg makes a good front man for the film, delivering the money quote that gets to the heart of Nevins’ study: “It’s tough to be a punk rock hero and still be an authority figure to my kids.” A case in point arises when Lindberg (who co-wrote the band’s anthem, “Fuck Authority”) is observed admonishing his young daughter for calling one of her siblings a “turdface”.

Nevins also weaves in a little history of the punk scene, with a primary focus on the SoCal bands, which adds context and some meaty substance (which helped me forgive the somewhat cliché ADD visual style of the film). The director saves her biggest emotional guns for the final third, when some of her subjects open up about their relationships with their own fathers, which for most were less than ideal (cue the waterworks). This is where the rubber meets the road, and the true takeaway is revealed: I never sang for my father, but I will sing* for my kids (*parents advisory: explicit lyrics).

.

Dennis Hartley 11/19/2011 06:00:00 PM |

 
14th Amendment personhood

by digby

In today's Focus on the Theocrats presidential debate (led by an over-the-top lugubrious Frank Luntz) some fellow asked if, in the event that Roe vs Wade was overturned, would they propose a federal ban on abortion? Newt said that he agreed with Robert George's proposal to apply the 14th Amendment to fetuses.(And would also insist that the courts have no jurisdiction to boot.)

Here's George's question on the subject at a recent GOP presidential forum:

Many believe that we need a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade. However, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment expressly empowers the Congress, by appropriate legislation, to enforce the guarantees of due process and equal protection contained in the Amendment’s first section. As someone who believes in the inherent and equal dignity of all members of the human family, including the child in the womb, would you propose to Congress appropriate legislation, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, to protect human life in all stages and conditions?

Newt, Bachman and Cain all said yes. Perry wasn't in yet. Ron Paul said no at that time. Today he said that he was for it but that the states should enforce it, whatever that means. Romeny hedged, but basically said no. (He wasn't at this debate today.)

Here's the thing I find odd about all this. This has been a part of the GOP platform for a long time:


GOP platform

Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life

Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.

Granted, George is saying they can skip that whole inconvenient amendment thing. But the essential question is the same.

Here's the pertinent passage of the 14th amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It's "personhood" along the lines of that failed Mississippi initiative.Fetuses are to be given equal protection.

I wonder whose property the uterus really is?


.
digby 11/19/2011 04:45:00 PM |

 
Symbolism

by David Atkins

A picture is worth a thousand words:



Little more about the response to the Occupy movement need be said.

.
thereisnospoon 11/19/2011 03:00:00 PM |

 
Thanksgiving Family Forum

by digby

I don't now why this has been kept so under wraps but there's a GOP presidential debate happening today at 5est, 2pst. No C-SPAN, but you can watch online.

With Frank Luntz officiating!

Watch live stream video, via CitizenLink. In addition to the web-cast, there will also be radio coverage on 89 stations and live stream audio stream via Bott Radio Network and mobile phone iPhone and iPad app and Android app.

The forum location is First Federated Church in Des Moines, Iowa and the start time is 5 p.m. ET. Check TimeandDate.com for starting time other time zones late on Nov. 19, or early Nov. 20 morning. The replay video and transcript will be posted as soon as available along a round up of summaries, reviews, commentary and recap.

Click here for more on the the debate and TV and radio broadcast schedule; C-SPAN will not be broadcasting live. See also the official Citizen Link Facebook page and Twitter @citizenlink for updates. Click here for the latest news for attendees in Des Moines, Iowa

. Follow the conversation on Twitter with hashtag #tff11.

.
digby 11/19/2011 01:51:00 PM |

 
Up with Chris Hayes scoop

by digby

Chris Hayes had a blockbuster scoop this morning: a memo from a top DC lobbying firm that outlines a plan to discredit Occupy Wall Street and use it against Democrats in the upcoming elections. It's quite clever. And it's the type of tactic could prove to be very useful to Wall Street.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The whole memo is here.

Here's the MSNBC story about it.


.
digby 11/19/2011 12:30:00 PM |

 
Yes of course pepper spray is a torture device

by digby

The hideous pepper spraying of college students at UC Davis yesterday reminds me of a similar case in the 90s, which I've written about several times before.

In 1997, environmentalists were staging a sit-in against the cutting of old forest in Humboldt county. The police sprayed pepper spray directly into the protesters eyes in similar fashion to what happened in UC yesterday and then used liquified pepper spray and applied it directly to the protesters eyes with q-tips. I'm not kidding. There's video:




I was writing about the use of tasers when I wrote this piece back in 2009:

Why is it that the taser videos always show a bunch of cops sauntering around, three or four of them bent over a prone person in handcuffs, blithely administering the taser as if they are merely wiping a speck of dust off the suspects shirt? I think that's the part I find so chilling --- it's so methodical, so cold, so completely inhuman --- that it seems like something out of a dystopian sci-fi novel featuring robots or aliens.

I'll never forget the horror of seeing the video of those environmental protesters having their eyes calmly swabbed with Q tips soaked in liquid pepper spray, by the Humboldt County sheriffs dept. In searching for the video I came across this San Francisco Examiner editorial from 1997, that could be written today about tasers:

Justifying Torture

Law enforcement arguments in a federal lawsuit are malarkey - pepper spray used senselessly hurts cops as much as protesters

San Francisco Examiner
Monday, Nov. 17, 1997 Page A 18

It's almost farcical for law enforcement officials to continue defending pepper spray as a weapon to get protesters to follow orders. A videotape of officers applying pepper spray in liquid form to demonstrators' eyes shows the technique to be a form of torture.

Yet, attorneys for the Humboldt County Sheriff and the Eureka Police Department argue in federal court that this use of pepper spray is legitimate and unobjectionable. In court papers filed in a protesters' suit against the cops, police training expert Joseph J. Callahan Jr. says, implausibly, that the videotape could be used as a training film "illustrating modern police practices delivered in a calm, deliberate manner." (Remind us not to volunteer as guinea pigs for Mr. Callahan.)

The videotape was shot by Humboldt sheriff's deputies at an Oct. 16 demonstration, against logging in the Headwaters Forest, that took place in the Eureka office of Rep. Frank Riggs, R-Windsor. Four women who had chained themselves together with heavy metal "black bears" got liquid pepper spray rubbed into their eyes with cotton swabs, and one woman who refused even then to move had the pepper mist sprayed into her face.

This hurts, as the videotaped reactions make clear. But it broke up the demonstration pronto, and that's what counted for the law enforcers.

"At stake," attorneys for the cops argue, "is whether professionally trained police officers are to be deprived of the use of pepper spray, a substance carried by millions of private citizens in this country."

But this is really not the issue. Most people don't object to police using pepper spray the way it's designed to be used: To subdue a suspect who threatens officers or threatens to flee. Neither occurred in the case of the Eureka protesters.

Police shouldn't use pepper spray, or any other weapon, to dish out punishment to suspects. Just because cops are in a hurry doesn't make it OK for them to take shortcuts, or inflict pain to get things done.

The argument doesn't wash that no lasting damage was done by the pepper spray. By the same logic, police could use branding irons, sharp knives or psychological abuse on recalcitrant protesters as long as "no lasting damage was done."

Other police legal arguments are similarly shallow. An attorney for the cops said the use of heavy metal sleeves linked with chains that made protesters virtually immovable amounted to "active resistance," justifying the use of pepper spray.

In the past, police used metal grinders to cut through the heavy metal in order to oust demonstrators. That takes longer and is inconvenient, but it doesn't violate anyone's civil rights or threaten their physical well-being.

No one wants to live in a society where police are free to do whatever they wish in order to punish suspected law breakers. Cruel and unusual punishment is outlawed by the Constitution. And anyway, punishment is up to the courts to determine and the penal system to administer.

What cops risk through indiscriminate use of pepper spray, and its indiscriminate defense in court, is losing it altogether. If police are too dense to distinguish between legitimate use and torture, the Legislature should eliminate any confusion and outlaw pepper spray, period.

That holds true for all weapons that can be used for torture.

It took three tries and eight years, but the protesters finally won their case against the police in federal court. They were awarded a dollar.

It took them three times and 12 years, but they won it. So, do you think those UC Davis cops know that?

An eight-person federal jury has returned a unanimous verdict for the Q-Tip Pepper Spray Eight activists/plaintiffs, finding the County of Humboldt and City of Eureka liable for excessive force in violation of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The excessive force was used by Humboldt County Sheriff's Deputies and Eureka Police Officers when they applied pepper spray with Q-tips directly to the eyes of the eight nonviolent forest defense protesters in three incidents in 1997. Three of the activists were also sprayed directly in the eyes from inches away. Two of the young women were juveniles.

Former Sheriff Dennis Lewis and current Sheriff Gary Philp also were found liable for causing the use of excessive force by setting policies allowing the unprecedented use of pepper spray on the passive demonstrators, who had locked their arms together inside metal pipes.

The plaintiffs laughed and hugged in the courthouse hallways after the verdicts were read and applauded when jurors left their chambers. "They did the right thing," said plaintiff Terri "Compost" Slanetz, a 42-year-old naturalist from Oakland. "We've been trying all along to get a statement that this was illegal. It's a positive step toward people treating each other decently."

Juror Athene Aquino, a 35-year-old Citibank employee, said she was convinced the force was excessive by watching a video showing the deputies swapping pepper spray in the protesters' eyes. When she viewed the tape, Aquino said she "started crying. It was just very emotional."

The jury awarded nominal damages of only $1 to each of the plaintiffs, who made it clear all along that they weren't suing for the money, but to bring about a change of policy, to prevent the future use of pepper spray in Humboldt in the way it was used on them. They hope and expect that the verdict will reverberate far beyond rural Humboldt County to make it clear that police can not use the extremely painful pepper spray on non-violent people to coerce them to follow orders.

Lawyer Tony Serra called the verdict a "mixed metaphor." He said, "The verdict establishes now and forever that pepper spray applied in this fashion in these circumstances is excessive force. That will deter law enforcement officials throughout the country in the use of pepper spay and that's very good." But Serra said, "These young people suffered grievous mental anguish and should have been given a substantial amount of money to recompense them."

The defendants may be required to pay the reasonable attorney fees and costs of the plaintiffs, which will no doubt exceed $1 million for litigating the case through three trials and multiple appeals as high as the U.S. Supreme Court.

I don't know if the great civil liberties lawyer who won that one, Tony Serra, is still practicing, but if he is I'll bet he'd take the UC Davis case.

This article called "Pepper Spray, Pain and Justice" from the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project in northern California on the use of pepper stray as a torture device gives all the details of this famous case. It has informed my thinking about tasers and other uses of "pain compliance" and its implications for a free society. It's not long and I urge you to read it all if this situation alarms you.

It tells the harrowing story that you see in that video up top, including the chilling statement by the police after they were done pepper spraying one of the girls directly in the face: "We're not torturing you anymore."

It asks the question:

Are these valid tactics for the DA's office to use? May the Sheriff and the DA single out forest activists for "special treatment" when they are arrested and charged? The argument for this would be that the protests are costly to the county, and in an effort to contain those costs by reducing the number of protesters, or to prevent nonviolent civil disobedience which is expensive to the government, the government may use its discretionary powers to make the experience these activists have with the criminal justice system as unpleasant and costly as possible. The use of pepper spray to torment activists who are nonviolently sitting-in can be seen as the latest and most extreme step in this campaign.

The difficulty with this approach is that it puts the Sheriff and the DA into the position of the judge. It metes out punishment -- pain, days in jail, costly trips to court, disruption of normal life -- without the bother of proving guilt. Did the Queen in Alice in Wonderland say, "First the sentence, then the trial"? Even children can see that this is backwards.

One would think so. At the time this was written, they assumed the case would be decided in 1998. As I wrote, it was finally decided in 2009. But a jury found for the activists.

Of course it's torture. It couldn't be more obvious. The question we have to ask ourselves if our society believes torturing of political dissidents is acceptable.

What do you think?

.
digby 11/19/2011 09:51:00 AM |

 
Selling things people want

David Atkins

The Wall Street Perspective:

To put it bluntly, many on Wall Street still see the events leading up to the financial crisis as a case of banks having legitimately sold something - whether it be mortgages or securities backed by those loans - that someone wanted to buy.

Thomas Atteberry, a partner and portfolio manager with Los Angeles-based First Pacific Advisors, a $16 billion money management firm, says his success "wasn't a gift" and he had to work hard to get where he is. Atteberry says he understands the frustration many feel about income inequality. But he said the problem isn't with those who are successful, but rather our "tax codes and regulations."

There are many products and services in addition to spiking ARM mortgages, naked credit default swaps and BBB tranches of collateralized debt obligations that people want to buy. Also in demand are:

• Professional hitmen


• Professional sex services including underage prostitution


• Animal crush videos


• High grade heroin


• Weapons grade plutonium


• Fire insurance on our rude neighbor's home


• Currency counterfeiting machines

Why does Big Government insist on restricting the flow of goods and services people want to buy with pesky tax codes and regulations? It's so unfair to the successful pimps, drug kingpins, arms dealers, mafia dons and human traffickers who have worked hard to get where they are.


.
thereisnospoon 11/19/2011 07:30:00 AM |

Friday, November 18, 2011

 
Those brave, brave police

by David Atkins

Lieutenant John Pike at U.C. Davis was videotaped today bravely defending himself from a group of seated, immobile OWS students on the quad.



From another angle:


Clearly, you can see from the picture that Lieutenant Pike is in mortal danger. Fearing for his safety, had no choice but to use pepper spray. So says the U.C. Davis PD:

“I don’t think that was warranted,” one protester told CBS13. “It was non-violent protests, we were sitting, linking arms.”

UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza said officers used force out of concern for their own safety after they were surrounded by students.

“If you look at the video you are going to see that there were 200 people in that quad,” said Chief Spicuzza. “Hindsight is 20-20 and based on the situation we were sitting in, ultimately that was the decision that was made.”

Authorities are still reviewing video of the incident, Spicuzza added.

Dangerous, dangerous hippies. Breitbart's editor will be thrilled that they got what was coming to them. Ann Coulter helpfully suggests that the students just be shot like at Kent State.

Not that the public would get outraged much about that. After all, they weren't too terribly outraged by it last time, either.

.
thereisnospoon 11/18/2011 11:08:00 PM |

 
Easy for him to say

by digby

Via Thinkprogress:

During a town hall meeting in Ottumwa, Iowa this afternoon, Rick Santorum argued that Americans receive too many government benefits and ought to “suffer” in the Christian tradition. If “you’re lower income, you can qualify for Medicaid, you can qualify for food stamps, you can qualify for housing assistance,” Santorum complained, before adding, “suffering is part of life and it’s not a bad thing, it is an essential thing in life.”

And anyone knows about suffering, he does:

By running for president, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum forfeited what appears to be his single-biggest source of income last year: the $293,153 he drew as a commentator on Fox News.

The cable network suspended Mr. Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as paid contributors back in March after both took steps to pursue presidential bids.

The Pennsylvania senator earned at least $970,000 last year, according to financial disclosure forms released Thursday by the Federal Election Commission.

Now I know that poor Rick is hanging on the ragged edge of the 1%, but I'm still going to call anyone who earns almost a millions dollars in one year (on Wingnut welfare no less) a very, very lucky fellow who really shouldn't be telling people who qualify for food stamps that suffering is part of life.


.
digby 11/18/2011 06:00:00 PM |

 
Signal Man

by digby

Here's an interesting interview with the fellow who put together that "bat-signal" last night in NYC. It's all good, but this is my favorite part:

XJ: How did you go about finding someone nearby who would allow you stage this from inside their home?

MR: Opposite the Verizon building, there is a bunch of city housing. Subsidized, rent-controlled. There's a lack of services, lights are out in the hallways, the housing feels like jails, like prisons. I walked around, and put up signs in there offering money to rent out an apartment for a few hours. I didn't say much more. I received surprisingly few calls, and most of them seemed not quite fully "there." But then I got a call from a person who sounded pretty sane. Her name was Denise Vega. She lived on the 16th floor. Single, working mom, mother of three.

I spoke with her on the phone, and a few days later went over and met her.

I told her what I wanted to do, and she was enthused. The more I described, the more excited she got.

Her parting words were, "let's do this."

She wouldn't take my money. That was the day of the eviction of Zuccotti, the same day. And she'd been listening to the news all day, she saw everything that had happened.

"I can't charge you money, this is for the people," she said.

She was born in the projects. She opened up her home to us.

She was in there tonight with her 3 daughters, 2 sisters. The NYPD started snooping around down on the ground while the projections were up, it was clear where we were projecting from, and inside it was festive.

"If they want to come up they're gonna need a warrant!," her family was saying. "If they ask us, well, we don't know what they are talking about!" They were really brave and cool.

More on the tech side of the movement in this fascinating article at The Atlantic. I don't think any of us, and certainly not the mainstream press, have any idea of the real scope of this thing.


.
digby 11/18/2011 04:00:00 PM |