Happy Fist Bump Day

Remember June 3rd, 2008? The fist bump heard ‘round the world? Now we can celebrate it as another holiday!

This June 3, a group of media and design impresarios are promoting “National
Fist Bump Day” in honor of the anniversary. They want to celebrate a new iconic American expression of authenticity, political transparency and of course, change we can believe in.

"The idea behind National Fist Bump Day is to give Americans a chance to make the world a slightly better place with a simple and fun gesture of respect," says David Weiner, one of the organizers, along with Sarah Greenwalt. “It may not solve the world's problems, but it can at least reaffirm the fact that in the end, we all can get down with each other.”

http://theroot.com/views/bump-heard-round-world

Sweaterman, I expect you to be out knocking knuckles for the good of America today.
(H/T Booman Tribune)

Loving the Husky Women

Nice. My alma mater, the University of Washington, wins the national championship in women's softball. Danielle Lawrie, I think I love you!

Art

Artwork by Lynd Ward. For Dr. George Tiller. who was assassinated this morning. I've run out of things to say (via .McClatchy)

Closing California

I grew up in San Francisco and various parts of Northern California, so I'm somewhat sentimental about the stunning beauty of the state, much of it protected within the state parks. Now the state has a budget crisis (mostly of their own making), and Arnie is proposing cutting everything that is good (at DownWithTyranny Dr. Kirk Murphy has a great post about the impact on health care), because he can't possibly raise taxes:

Nearly every state park in the Bay Area — from the towering redwoods at Big Basin to Angel Island, Mount Tamalpais to Mount Diablo and every state beach from Año Nuevo in San Mateo County to Big Sur — would close as part of budget cuts proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In all, 220 of California's 279 state parks, about 80 percent, would be padlocked starting as soon as Labor Day, under details of a historic closing plan released Thursday night by the state parks department.

...

On Tuesday, as part of an effort to close the state's $24 billion deficit, Schwarzenegger unveiled a series of proposed cuts. They included a plan to eliminate $70 million in state general fund money to parks in the year that ends in June 2010 and $143 million of that funding by June 2011. The latter number represents 40 percent of the state park system's $387 million operating budget.

Layoffs could hit 1,500 or more of the 2,900 state parks employees

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_12481195

Remarkably short-sighted, but Californian's have a long history of bad planning in their quest for immediate gratification. Cutting taxes and hoping that magic elves will take care of everything has been the California system for decades. Here's a simple equation: a study by the University of California-Berkeley found that for every $1 in public money spent on state parks, $2.35 is returned to the state in taxes from tourism and other revenue they generate. So the current proposal will only make the deficit worse in the future.

Julia Pfiffer Burns State Park

Now That's Inhanced Interrogation

When it comes to "interrogation techniques" here's an enhancement that I can support. The suspected terrorist, Abu Jandal, was Osama bin Laden's bodyguard, and one very tough customer. So how do you make him talk?:

Abu Jandal had been in a Yemeni prison for nearly a year when Ali Soufan of the FBI and Robert McFadden of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service arrived to interrogate him in the week after 9/11. Although there was already evidence that al-Qaeda was behind the attacks, American authorities needed conclusive proof, not least to satisfy skeptics like Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, whose support was essential for any action against the terrorist organization. U.S. intelligence agencies also needed a better understanding of al-Qaeda's structure and leadership. Abu Jandal was the perfect source: the Yemeni who grew up in Saudi Arabia had been bin Laden's chief bodyguard, trusted not only to protect him but also to put a bullet in his head rather than let him be captured.

Abu Jandal's guards were so intimidated by him, they wore masks to hide their identities and begged visitors not to refer to them by name in his presence. He had no intention of cooperating with the Americans; at their first meetings, he refused even to look at them and ranted about the evils of the West. Far from confirming al-Qaeda's involvement in 9/11, he insisted the attacks had been orchestrated by Israel's Mossad. While Abu Jandal was venting his spleen, Soufan noticed that he didn't touch any of the cookies that had been served with tea: "He was a diabetic and couldn't eat anything with sugar in it." At their next meeting, the Americans brought him some sugar-free cookies, a gesture that took the edge off Abu Jandal's angry demeanor. "We had showed him respect, and we had done this nice thing for him," Soufan recalls. "So he started talking to us instead of giving us lectures."

It took more questioning, and some interrogators' sleight of hand, before the Yemeni gave up a wealth of information about al-Qaeda — including the identities of seven of the 9/11 bombers — but the cookies were the turning point. "After that, he could no longer think of us as evil Americans," Soufan says. "Now he was thinking of us as human beings."

http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/05/29/i-guess-the-use-of-sugar-free-cookies-saved-lives-just-didnt-sound-tough-enough/

Yup, sugar-free cookies. Humane treatment and cookies can break even the toughest terrorist. Not waterboarding, or any of the other 'Jack Bauer' crap. Because even terrorists like cookies.

(Added on Sunday: Now in - time magazine. Maybe I can get a pro gig someday.)

Age Check

Here's one that may make some of us feel a little old: if JFK were still alive, today would be his 92nd birthday. If you're old enough to remember JFK, you remember him as a youthful, good-looking, energetic President who was tragically cut down in his prime. It's hard to imagine him as a 92 year old.

America's Leading Boobie Blog

I'm claiming that title.

We're #9!

Somehow Kiplinger's "best cities" ranking concluded that my little town, No. 9: Flagstaff, Arizona, (out of 361) is a great place to live. I'd love to agree with them, but their reasoning will sound somewhat strange to us locals:

we assembled candidates for our 2009 Best Cities list, which focuses on places that have stable employment plus the talent to create new, well-paying positions. A robust job market makes these cities safe havens during the recession and will give them a head start toward growth when the recovery takes off.

http://www.kiplinger.com/magazine/archives/2009/07/best-cities-2009-where-the-jobs-are.html

Um, guys...our local job market sucks. I hope you're right about a "robust job market" "when the recovery takes off", but as of today Flagstaff lives up to our city slogan "poverty with a view". Wages are low, jobs are few, and housing costs are high. Certainly the region boasts some of the most beautiful countryside in the nation, and Flagstaff is a very warm friendly town. I love it here. But to make it in Flagstaff you have to be willing to scale down your expectations. Sure, there are a few people prospering, but the vast majority of this town is barely scraping by.

So maybe we should be honored to be ranked so high, but I'm not sure that Kiplinger's was looking at the same city.

I'm Sold on Sotomayor

So Obama has nominated Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court; all I can say is: great choice! As President Obama pointed out, Ms. Sotomayor's credentials include one of the most important decisions of my lifetime: she saved Baseball:

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are rarely famous or widely celebrated. Yet during a brief period in 1995, Judge Sonia Sotomayor became revered, at least in those cities with major league baseball teams.

She ended a long baseball strike that year, briskly ruling against the owners in favor of the players.

The owners were trying to subvert the labor system, she said, and the strike had “placed the entire concept of collective bargaining on trial.”

After play resumed, The Philadelphia Inquirer wrote that by saving the season, Judge Sotomayor joined forever the ranks of Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Jackie Robinson and Ted Williams. The Chicago Sun-Times said she “delivered a wicked fastball” to baseball owners and emerged as one of the most inspiring figures in the history of the sport.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15sotomayor.html

We all know that the right wing is going to do everything they can to trash her (or any other Obama nominee), as they've already told us:

This month, as it appeared increasingly likely that Sotomayor would be Obama's nominee, the judge has been the target of a whisper campaign, and many leading far-right activists -- including Limbaugh and Fox News personalities -- started the offensive against her weeks ago.

For what it's worth, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said earlier this month that Sotomayor would face stiff GOP opposition if she were nominated for the high court. Since that would be true of any Obama nominee, it hardly matters.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

So whenever a winger starts attacking, we should immediately ask them "Why do you hate Baseball?"; and by extension America. Ask them if they also oppose 'Mom and Apple Pie'. Maybe I'll start a new PAC: "Baseball fans for Sotomayor". Who's with me?

Memorial Day

The day we remember our fallen service members and begin the summer barbeque season. It's good that we take some time to honor those who've served to guard our freedoms, but I wish that we would also take some time to prevent adding to their ranks. There are wars that are just and necessary, but all too many have been fought for less than noble causes.
I never served in the military (being in the post-Vietnam years), and my family has a long history of missing wars, either serving during peacetime or not being eligible to serve (gramps had TB, and wasn't allowed to join WW11). The last of my ancestors to be injured in combat was in the war of 1812, and he survived another 42 years. So I don't have any strong family connection to our brave warrior class.
But I've known many veterans, and I've seen their pain. Our memorial should include a pledge to stop adding to their numbers needlessly. The sadly unnecessary war in Iraq has added over 4,000 new graves to be memorialized, with more to come before we find our way out. We can best honor them by preventing needless wars in the future.

This Friday's Boobie

Another Friday, another Boobie.

Why Can't We Be Rid of The Cheney?

Correct me if I'm right, but The Cheney doesn't hold any office, does he? He's an ex-VP, so he has the same gravitas as Dan Quayle. His only claim to fame is being the most evil, un-American, yet (so far) un-indicted war criminal in modern history. Why is he on my TV?.
Somehow the 'debate' on national security is now a game show, where the President's speech must be 'balanced' with a voice from the 'opposition' to provide 'fairness', but why the hell is The Cheney that voice? I must have missed the part of the Shrub administration where the opposition had to be given "equal time and respect", although Al Gore was allowed to be the subject of media ridicule from time to time.
But The Cheney is still spreading his lies, and the networks still pay attention. Today The Cheney cited the national security context as one in which they foremost fear was "a 9/11 with weapons of mass destruction.The Cheney said "al Qaeda was seeking nuclear weapons and that because Iraq had "known ties" to terrorists, the Bush administration focused on Iraq because it was a regime that "might transfer such weapons to terrorists." The old "Saddam-Al-Qaeda-WMD" story that has been shown to be false since it began, and is now known to be the product of torture. And The Cheney felt no shame about stating his own support for torturing detainees:

"In top secret meetings about enhanced interrogations, I made my own beliefs clear. I was and remain a strong proponent of our enhanced interrogation program."

http://washingtonindependent.com/44018/the-text-of-dick-cheneys-speech-at-aei

Brief memo to The Cheney: the Fifth Amendment doesn't really help if you make the statement on national TV. When you're finally on trial for your numerous crimes, they will use your own words against you.
But I'm still wondering why the hell anyone is putting you on my TV. If I wanted to watch a horror movie, I want good looking women between the scary parts. The Cheney should be in prison, not on TV.

(Added) The only "good" thing about The Cheney is that he proved that there are worse things than Richard Nixon, but that the country will survive them.

Not Quite the Strangest Proposal I've Read

This is certainly among the stranger proposals ever made to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (it's never going to happen, but it is an amusing idea):

A 12-year-old Iranian schoolboy who hopes to unseat hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has vowed that, if elected, he will resettle Israelis in Hawaii, The Scotsman reported on Friday.

"I will buy Hawaii, Obama's birthplace, from the United States and lease it to the Israelis who will go to live there - so that they don't kill children in Gaza," the Scottish daily quoted presidential candidate Kourosh Mozouni as saying.

The paper said Mozouni made the comments to reporters after he turned up to register holding his father's hand and waving a written campaign manifesto.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1086106.html

I didn't know that twelve-year-olds were even allowed to run for President in Iran, but lets face it: he's probably more mature than Ahmadinejad.

Yay for Hubble

I admit that I'm a "space junkie" and I can waste hours looking at Hubble's photos of other galaxies. So I'm really happy that the service mission appears to be a success. This one:

May 10, 2009: The Hubble community bids farewell to the soon-to-be decommissioned Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) onboard the Hubble Space Telescope. In tribute to Hubble's longest-running optical camera, planetary nebula K 4-55 has been imaged as WFPC2's final "pretty picture."

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2009/21/

Thanks to the service mission we should enjoy even deeper photos for at least another 10 years, which is great news. Sometimes it helps to take a break from politics and realize what a tiny little part of the universe we occupy.

Service mission updates here: http://hubblesite.org/servicing_mission_4/

Blaming Pelosi

Gotta love the latest rethug (Gingrich/Boehner) torture strategy: It's all Nancy Pelosi's fault. She was briefed by the CIA (maybe kinda sort of) that "enhanced interrogation" might be used, so she's responsible for everything that followed. When in doubt, blame a Democrat.
Of course this is ridiculous. Pelosi was House MINORITY leader in 2002-2003. She didn't (and couldn't) authorize, justify, or initiate torture. Shrub and the Cheney bear the sole responsibility for the appalling violations of national and international law, human rights, and the commission of war crimes. The Pelosi diversion is an attempt to distract the public away from the prosecution of the actual criminals; a variation of the childhood excuse "Johnny did it, too" defense. It didn't work with Mom when we were kids, and it shouldn't work in the "adult" world, either. Especially when we're talking about the most horrific crimes ever committed in the name of "America".
Even the most basic issue of Pelosi's possible complicity is rather weak. She says the briefings were vague and unspecific, that waterboarding could be used but not saying that it was already in use. Which makes sense. I doubt that the CIA came right out and said "we're torturing people", but rather left an opening for "plausible deniability" for all parties. Does this clear Pelosi? No. If she were a truly moral leader, she should have been screaming "STOP" at the very thought of America engaging in torture. But Nancy Pelosi is NOT a truly moral leader. She is a creature of congress who long ago sold out any principles she might have had in her pursuit of position and power on capitol hill. She is guilty of standing silent while the crime was committed, but that in no way absolves those who actually committed the crime.
Torture is wrong. Torture is always wrong. The (totally unrealistic) "ticking time bomb" scenarios DO NOT justify torture, nor does the patent lie that "it works". And the Shrub/Cheney torture program wasn't even focused on preventing another terrorist attack (which still isn't justified), but rather to promote a war with Iraq. A key revelation in last month’s Senate Armed Services Committee report on detainees — that torture was used to try to coerce prisoners into “confirming” a bogus Al Qaeda-Saddam Hussein link to sell that war — is finally attracting attention. The false confessions extracted from detainees were used by Shrub, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Powell,et al.,as "evidence" of the need to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. It was all a pack of lies, and it is the greatest crime in the history of American government. It is our international shame, and that shame will remain until the guilty are held accountable.
Pelosi may be guilty of complicity, but she is not the party responsible for the crime. Don't let the guilty use her to distract you from that basic fact. The Shrub administration is guilty of committing war crimes including torture. They are the ones who need to be tried and convicted.

Added: No doubt that Obama is trying to take the easy way out; doing nothing and hoping the issue will just go away. I'm not in any way surprised, but I think he's wrong. The enormity of the crimes demands investigation and prosecution, regardless of what Obama wants, and a "truth commission" or congressional investigation are likely inevitable.

Added2: See also Marcy Wheeler "Dick Cheney, Torture, Iraq, and Valerie Plame", and Think Progress "a disgraced Republican is attacking Pelosi". I'm not alone in my opinion.

Added3:Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) has written a poem "Fancy Nancy," to cast blame on Pelosi. It's as bad, or even worse, that you might have expected.

It's Friday Again

Time to bring out the Boobies.

The GOP Obituary Might Be Premature

As a liberal, I'm perfectly happy to see the Republican party in total disarray. But unlike a lot of the other liberal blogs, I'm not ready to predict their demise. While it's fun to watch them flounder about searching for a leader and a message, bad ideas have a way of returning over time and the public memory is remarkably short. It is amusing to watch desperate acts such as trying to rename the Democratic party as "The Democrat Socialist Party" (note to Republicans: the Democratic Socialists of America already exist; they just haven't won many elections) in hope of bringing back anti-communist hysteria, or the pro-torture snarlings of the Cheney in order to maintain the tough guy anti-terrorist image. Hoping that Limbaugh/Cheney/Gingrich can rehabilitate the party from the damage inflicted by the Shrub administration does seem delusional.
But the recent history of partisan politics should serve as a reminder of how quickly fortunes can turn. After the '64 election, the Republicans were thought dead. Post Watergate '73-'74, Nixon had so poisoned the Republican brand that a number of members of congress changed parties as the only hope of retaining their seats. Even as recently as the '92-'93 early Clinton popularity the Republicans were considered irrelevant. And the Democratic party has been written off for dead more than a few times. McGovern and the hippies were thought lethal, St. Ronnie led to the migration of the "Reagan Democrats", and a consensual blow job was considered such a moral outrage that no upstanding citizen would ever consider voting Democratic. Karl Rove thought that 9/11 could be used to create a "permanent Republican majority" and render the Democrats "irrelevant".
My point is that political fortunes turn, sometimes very quickly. The bad ideas and conservative constituencies that are the base of the Republican party still exist. The corporatist oligarchs still have the resources to promote their self-enriching deregulation agenda to the middle class, despite the fact it's been shown to be a total failure. The religious right can still move a large number of voters by demonizing gays and abortion. Characterizing Democrats as "tax and spend liberals" will still resonate with a percentage of voters, and there is always a market for the NRA's "liberals want to take away your guns" lie. So the people that bought Shrub could get fooled again.
Another factor that must be taken into account is that Obama was elected partly because of his charisma. While none of the current faces leading the Republicans can rival that, a charismatic individual could emerge in the future and rally enough voters to win. It's not like that's never happened before.

For Baseball Junkies Only

Gerardo Parra of the Diamondbacks just became the 100th player to hit a homerun on his first at-bat. (See opening season post for context).

Not Just Another Day

I like to think that I know myself pretty well, but sometimes I'm wrong. My emotional reaction to the first Mother's Day without my Mom was stronger and more painful that I expected. Mom passed in January, and while I thought that my grieving was mostly over I found myself really missing Mom. Thankfully I had some good friends around me (special thanks to Urland), or I might have been really depressed. But tears came at unexpected times, and the hole in my life was clear. Nobody will ever look as good on a Harley as my Mom did.
I hope you all took a moment to appreciate your own Mom, and if you are a Mom I hope you got the appropriate appreciation.

Replacing Souter

The retirement of Justice Souter brings focus to the reason that we should be glad that Barack Obama defeated John McCain. Appointing Supreme Court Justices is probably the most significant longterm act of any presidency, and the current court is the legacy of the presidents in our recent past. If McCain had won the election his appointment choice could have changed the basic philosophy of the court. One more staunch conservative vote would have changed the balance for many years.
Obama's choice won't.
The over-simplified reason is the current court balance. The four staunch conservatives (Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts) will be (barring the unforeseen) on the court for many more years, whereas the "liberals" are getting toward the end of their careers. Souter is now considered a "liberal" but only in a very "moderate" way. The balance still swings on Kennedy, a mostly conservative (but sane) jurist, so there is a sort of "balance" that will continue for the foreseeable future.
No matter how "liberal" Obama's choice is (I was hoping for Angela Davis), it's not going to change the "balance". The right wing will yell and scream about whoever he chooses, but it's a whole lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. The court will still be conservative, with a hint of moderation.
I'm guessing that Obama will choose someone (a woman) who is moderately liberal, and that confirmation will be relatively smooth. A "safe" choice (unless he gets a 'reverse Souter').
We'll hear a lot about the conservative "culture" issues of abortion and gay marriage, but the status quo will remain the same regardless of who Obama nominates. This isn't the vote that can change the game, so the fight will be mostly for show.
The only real court change will come when Kennedy or one of the conservatives leaves. Or we have another wacko conservative president (McCain-ish) who can push the court farther right. But Obama can't push the court further left with this appointment. 5 to 4 is still 5 to 4.