Boobie Day

Happy Friday. Here's a Boobie.

Revisiting the History of Renzi

In the long delayed prosecution of my former congress critter Rick Renzi, now news is coming out that confirms something I long suspected: Shrub's (in)justice department manipulated evidence to protect Renzi:

In the fall of 2006, one day after the Justice Department granted permission to a U.S. attorney to place a wiretap on a Republican congressman suspected of corruption, existence of the investigation was leaked to the press — not only compromising the sensitive criminal probe but tipping the lawmaker off to the wiretap.

Career federal law enforcement officials who worked directly on a probe of former Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) said they believe that word of the investigation was leaked by senior Bush administration political appointees in the Justice Department in an improper and perhaps illegal effort to affect the outcome of an election.

At the time of the leak, Renzi was locked in a razor-thin bid for reelection and unconfirmed reports of a criminal probe could have become politically damaging. The leaked stories — appearing 10 days before the election — falsely suggested that the investigation of Renzi was in its initial stages and unlikely to lead to criminal charges.

In fact, the investigation had been ongoing for some time and had already amassed enough evidence of alleged criminal misconduct to obtain approval from the highest levels of the Justice Department, including then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to seek an application from a federal judge to wiretap Renzi. In February 2008, a federal grand jury indicted Renzi on 36 felony counts of money laundering, extortion, insurance fraud and various other alleged crimes.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/bush-administration-leaks-bolstered-rick-renzis-reelection-bid-2009-06-24.html

Renzi didn't run for re-election in 2008 when his blatant corruption finally lead to criminal charges. His trial has been delayed to September of this year. But he barely managed to retain his seat in 2006 by downplaying the investigation, even though his corruption was well known to anyone paying attention.
One of the reasons that I began this blog was to attempt to fight against Mr. Renzi, who represented my district. I dedicated pictures of tattoo'd pigs to him, and I'm only too happy to revive the tradition. There have been a lot of corrupt congress critters, but he was consistently among the worst. The entire Shrub administration acted as a crime syndicate, and Renzi was a typical rethug criminal who belongs in jail.
So have another pig, Mr. Renzi. I'm looking forward to the trial.

Damn You, Sanford!

Here I had a perfectly good piece of political snark (see below), and in less than 24 hours you go and make it irrelevant. Any politician can run off and have an affair. I had hopes that you could give us real political weirdness, but this is just the usual run-of-the-mill sleaze (although it is slightly exotic to be boffing an Argentinian, rather than the standard white staffer).
I really wish that my lame attempts at humor had a longer shelf life.

Sanford in 2012

OK, time for a little baseless speculation (and take full advantage of the opportunity to snicker):

Check out this set of facts. Fact 1: Gov. Mark Sanford went missing Thursday and hasn't been seen since. Fact 2: His staff has since told us that the governor has been hiking the Appalachian Trail. Fact 3: Sunday was "Naked Hiking Day" on the Appalachian Trail. We kid you not.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/06/23/1974627.

While no one I know wants to see a naked republican governor, Sanford could take a bold step to change the image of the republican party. Imagine him declaring "I'm the only candidate who's openly pro-walking naked in the woods." Where would Obama stand on the "nude hiking" issue? I'm thinking this could be a real winner for the republicans.

(added: Sanford now says he was in Argentina. I'm still looking for a good political snark angle in that.)

A Couple More Pics

A couple more from the Pagosa/Animas trip. Because they make me happy.

Can't wait to do it again.

Happy Summer Solstice

And Happy Father's Day.

Local News Can Be Fun

Ah, the joys of living in a smaller city. Little things make the front page of the paper:

Two city police officers have been placed on paid leave after police officials received photos of the officers surrounded by four women in what police officials call suggestive poses.

The photos show two uniformed officers in their patrol cars stopped at an intersection. Four women stand outside of one patrol car and have posed themselves in a manner that Police Chief Brent Cooper said the officers should have known might have happened.




"We're very embarrassed by this," Cooper said. "We're very disappointed our officers allowed themselves to get drawn into it."

http://www.azdailysun.com/articles/2009/06/19/news/20090619_front_198395.txt

I know two of the women in the photos, and they're both sweet, fun-loving, and intelligent ladies. Seems pretty harmless to me, but I guess the law enforcement bosses don't share my sense of humor. The two officers were reprimanded and suspended for one day; not a huge punishment, but still rather silly and unnecessary.
It does make the local newspaper more entertaining, though.

We Need More Boobies

It's true. We need more Boobies. Please send me your Boobie pics ASAP. Thanks.

Well...

Our President will harm a fly...
Whereas...
the Cheney would have killed a kitten...
and shrub would have eaten the fly...by mistake
but Rove would have called it "manly"

Thoughts on Iran

First, if you want real insight into the events in Iran, I recommend (as with all things Middle East) that you read Juan Cole. Also, Andrew Sullivan (who I usually disagree with) has been doing a great job covering the Iran protests. And finally, this piece by Robert Fisk. (Added: see also Watergate Summer, where Enigma4ever has a great roundup). They, and many other real experts, will give you more serious insight than I am capable of. That said, here's some of my view:
First, it's important to remember that the Iranian election isn't about us. The vast majority of Iranian voters were angry about Iran's domestic economy. Opposition to Amahdinejad came primarily from the ongoing poverty in Iran in the face of vast oil wealth, not an opposition to the Islamic theocracy. One reason that the blatant election fraud seems so strange is that Moussavi is also supported by, and a strong supporter of, the Islamic council that is the true power in Iran. It's really unclear to me why the Ayatollah (and the supreme council) chose to rig the election, since the real power (and control of the Republican Guard) would remain unchanged, regardless of who won a legitimate election. By engaging in such blatant disregard of the voters will, they've actually weakened their own position. The Islamic Republic was under no threat from Moussavi. Now they are under threat from the massive public outcry.
Second, there is the history of mass protest in Iran from 1979. Each death leads to an additional demonstration of mourning. The 1979 revolution only came about after almost a year of daily demonstrations. So crackdowns will continue to bring more people out into the streets, and further weaken the government control as family loyalties (the strongest bond in Iranian society) tax the guards loyalty to the government. The Shah lost when his guards defected to join their brothers and sisters in the Green Bands (side note to media pundits: the Green Bands were the Islamic militia in 1979; wearing green bands still symbolize support for Islamic law, not some sort of western ideal of "freedom fighters"). This may take a while to play out.
Thirdly, Obama seems to be doing the right thing, by trying to remain uninvolved. He's walking a tightrope, but faced with the history of American meddling in Iran, support for the protesters is bound to backfire. The Iranian government is already portraying the demonstrations as the result of foreign provocation. Regardless of America's preference, Obama will need to deal with the eventual victor, and any American endorsement will only poison future relations.
While I said earlier that this isn't "about us", it's certainly clear that America would prefer to see Amahdinejad out of power. Amahdinejad's bombastic anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric has made it almost impossible to conduct any realistic dialog with him. He's created an adversarial relationship, and shrub and the neocons were perfectly willing to engage as adversaries. It's almost impossible to negotiate when both parties start by calling the other "evil". Moussavi is anti-American and anti-Israeli, but he's much calmer in his rhetoric than Amahdinejad, so there's a chance to open talks with a 'clean slate' (in reality, a less tainted slate), or at least without the baggage of recent years. I doubt that it will be a 'warm friendly' relationship, but it would allow us to pull back from the brink of war.
Added:

Those Mousavi supporters are using the slogans of the Islamic Revolution and it's my understanding that they are mostly simply seeking a return to the status quo ante, when their votes meant something in the half-rigged Islamic Republic's system. They're not looking to depose the mullahs and they're not looking to break the system that's persisted since 1979 - they just want it to work as advertised. Nowhere is this clearer than in their choice of leaders: Mousavi, Rafsanjani, Khatami, Montazeri. All members in good standing of the Iranian politico-clerical elite and all standing to gain nothing from a break-up of the existing system. As Trita Parsi writes:

What's often forgotten amid the genuinely awe-inspiring spectacle of hundreds of thousands of long-suppressed people risking their lives on the streets to demand change is the fact that the political contest playing out in the election is, in fact, among rival factions of the same regime. Ahmadinejad represents a conservative element, backed by the Supreme Leader, that believes the established political class has hijacked the revolution and enriched themselves and is fearful that the faction's more pragmatic inclination toward engagement with the West could lead to a normalization of relations that will "pollute" Iran's culture and weaken the regime. Mousavi is not really a reformer so much as a pragmatic, moderate conservative who has campaigned with the backing of the reform movement because it recognizes that he has a better chance of unseating Ahmadinejad than one of their own would have.

(from http://www.newshoggers.com/)

Last Weekend

A quick pic from last weekend's river play. We ran the Pagosa Springs stretch of the San Juan on Saturday, and the Animas on Sunday. That's me and Zymurgian in the front of the raft on the Saturday run. No big challenges on either run, but it was enough to test my shoulder and great to be back on the water.

USD hegemony over

Chris Hedges on the coming decline of the USD

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090614_the_american_empire_is_bankrupt/

Boobie Watch

The Friday Boobie is here, and with that I'm hitting the road. Enjoy your weekend.

Animas Bound

Leaving in the morning for Durango, CO, for Animas River Days. ARD is more of a "river party" than a serious whitewater river trip, but since it's my first time out since breaking the shoulder I'm looking forward to a challenge. If nothing else, it feels like I'm starting to break away from physical restrictions, step by step. I think I know what I'm doing (don't we all), but there is the chance that the shoulder could fail me. During today's physical therapy I did a bunch of tests, and my right side has less than 50% of the strength of my left (making me a left-winger) on most of them. Pain is still a part of any thing I do using my right arm. But I've made so much progress over the past few months that my therapist's words were "go for it" and "50% of your baseline is stronger than most people will ever be" (yeah, I used to be pretty solid), and I really need some whitewater to nurture my soul. So, fornicate the risk, I'm doing it.
I'll try to get a Boobie up before I leave in the morning, but otherwise I'll see you next week.

Solar Powered Garbage Cans

More accurately: Solar Powered Trash Compacters. These are being installed around downtown Flagstaff.

How cool is that?

I don't know what other cities are using these, but I'm really happy to see them in town.

Supreme Court Confusion

I admit to being fairly ignorant when it comes to the 'legalese' that most Supreme Court decisions contain. But Scalia's dissent in yesterday's decision on recusal of Judges sounds incredibly strange to me:

A Talmudic maxim instructs with respect to the Scripture: “Turn it over, and turn it over, for all is therein.” The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Aboth, Ch. V, Mishnah 22 (I. Epstein ed. 1935). Divinely inspired text may contain the answers to all earthly questions, but the Due Process Clause most assuredly does not. The Court today continues its quixotic quest to right all wrongs and repair all imperfections through the Constitution. Alas, the quest cannot succeed—which is why some wrongs and imperfections have been called nonjusticiable. In the best of all possible worlds, should judges sometimes recuse even where the clear commands of our prior due process law do not require it? Undoubtedly. The relevant question, however, is whether we do more good than harm by seeking to correct this imperfection through expansion of our constitutional mandate in a manner ungoverned by any discernable rule. The answer is obvious.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-22.ZD1.html

(bold added by me) The case (which was decided 5-4) basically said Judges should recuse themselves from cases that involve campaign donors (more details here: http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2009/06/08/horse-puckey-at-the-high-court/#more-15331). Seems pretty straightforward. But Scalia seems to be saying that because we can't have judicial perfection we shouldn't attempt to prevent judicial corruption. Citing the Talmud as containing "the answers to all earthly questions" sounds overtly theological, but not particularly logical. Which is where I get confused. I usually find Scalia's conservative corporatist views appalling, but extremely logical. He's usually very good at articulating his point of view, even if you disagree with his conclusion. This time his argument strikes me as truly bizarre twist of logic.

Added: Please feel free to compare/contrast with Sonia Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comments.

Moving the Democratic Party

Well, OK, just the local one. I'm off to help with moving the local Democratic party headquarters to a new office. The old office was in a warehouse by the railroad tracks, but now the party is moving into a real office near the public library. Don't know how this will impact politics or party policies, but we'll have a barbecue at the end of the move.

And completely unrelated news: in a World Cup qualifying match North Korea and Iran tied 0-0. There must be a joke in there somewhere, but I just can't think of one.
(added: never mind. Iran won the rematch 1-0)

Physical Therapy Update

(old x-ray; I don't have copies of the more recent ones)

I'm stiff and sore today, as a result of how hard I pushed myself in physical therapy yesterday. It's the price I expect to pay, and I'm not complaining. I've been really aggressive in my PT program, and both my surgeon and therapist have expressed concern that I might overdo it. I feel comfortable on how hard I'm pushing myself, and that I'm in touch with my body and know when to stop. It's hard to explain, but I know which pain is "good pain" and which pain means "stop!" But I'm highly motivated, and I have a goal: I want to get back on the river, so my shoulder has to get better. In my next step toward that goal, I'm doing Animas River Days next weekend on a paddle raft. It's a lower impact way to start with class 2 and 3 rapids, and being part of a paddle crew rather than full on oar rowing. At least one of my fellow boaters is nervous about my readiness, but I think I've convinced him that I'm up for it. This isn't the Canyon, or even the Juan. It's the Animas, and my shoulder is feeling stronger every day. So I'll keep working hard, even if it sometimes hurts.

Boobie Love

Don't they look happy on this Friday?

But Consider the Alternative

Almost everybody has already parsed Obama's Cairo speech, and most of the opinions are entirely predictable. The left loved parts of it, but felt Obama should have pushed a more progressive agenda. The right hated it, with much screaming about "apologies" and "terrorism" weakening America. The Israeli lobby doesn't want to be confronted about settlements, and most of the Muslim Middle East response is one of "very nice words, but what will be the action?"
One thing (almost) everybody agrees on is that Obama is a powerful speaker who can articulate his message clearly. Speeches don't change the world, but they sometimes shape perception And that was Obama's goal for this speech. On that criteria, the Cairo speech appears to be a success.
The thought that kept bouncing into my mind was "what if it were McCain on that stage?" While I actually doubt that McCain would have even attempted going to Cairo to make such an outreach, he would be compelled to articulate some Middle East position in some forum. And I just cannot imagine that his views would generate a positive resonance.
That's the crux of it. When progressives feel disappointed by Obama's moderation (and we feel it a lot), we must remember that the alternative we faced in McCain was a continuation of Shrub and the Republican international disaster. When Obama speaks on a global platform, it's a positive. Shrub and McCain induced a global cringe.