November 2006

In Case You Haven’t Seen the UCLA Tape

ArchPundit November 18, 2006 0 Comment

Go to AmericaBlog

The police tasered the student after he went limp.

Yeah. Non-lethal force is used when there is a threat. This is as stupid as when the police used pepper spray on non-violent protesters in Richard Pombo’s office. There is some indication the problem started when the random check of IDs was random to only the Iranian looking guy. That part needs to be figured out by an investigation.

However, that the police claim force was used when the student went limp is a major violation of police practices. In such cases you pick up the kid and put him in a cruiser–you don’t beat him, spray him with pepper spray, hit him with eletrical jolts.

Also, when other students came to his defense, they threatened to taser the objecting students.

Worse yet, Josh Marshall reports that UCLA only investigated after alum reports and the officers are not on administrative duty or leave.

“Stand up or you’ll get tased again” Then they tase him. They then scream at him to stand up again and tase him again. Finally the students move in to try and stop it and the police threaten to tase them after the intitial student has left and the students are attempting to gain information to report the incident.

UCLA is going to face the mother of all lawsuits on this one and the individual officers will almost certainly face criminal charges with significant prison time.

In college I saw more than a few incidents of students getting out of control—and none of them involved a student begging security to stop and going limp. I remember one particular jackass who beat his girlfriend and then after being sat on by 3 300 pound+ security guys screaming that he was going to kick their asses for 30 minutes while flailing.

I knew security so I walked up and chatted with the fourth guard standing up calling for the police for a minute and the entire attitude was completely different. It was one of annoyance, but indifference. They controlled the situation and didn’t particularly care for the kid on bottom–it wasn’t the first incident, though it was the last—but they weren’t wanting to beat him up. They were stopping him from violence against another. And even then they didn’t lose their temper and try and hurt the kid, they simply restrained him. It’s not terribly difficult to restrain someone going limp.

These guys weren’t police, they were security guards and they had pepper spray that they never even contemplated using under the circumstances because they were trained to deal with the situation, not make it worse.

In the Brightest Day, In the Blackest Night….

ArchPundit November 17, 2006 0 Comment

Green Lantern Theory Espoused in Vietnam

“We’ll succeed,” Bush added, “unless we quit.”

Even more fun:

“You’ve got to remember, whatever the Democrats say, it’s Bush still calling the shots. He believes it’s a matter of political will. That’s what [Henry] Kissinger told him. And he’s going to stick with it,” a former senior administration official said. “He [Bush] is in a state of denial about Iraq. Nobody else is any more. But he is. But he knows he’s got less than a year, maybe six months, to make it work. If it fails, I expect the withdrawal process to begin next fall.”

I can’t wait to see Hitchens and Reynolds try and argue that Bush is on the right track. According to Hitchens, Bush is taking advice from a war criminal–and Hitchens is right.

According to Reynolds, it was all about democracy and the old realists like Kissinger are evil.

For those developing elaborate plans to salvage Iraq and appear “serious” here’s the problem. The President is convinced that by staying we are accomplishing something other than getting young men and women killed and maimed.

Bush sees this as a simple problem. It should be readily apparent that it is not. To him, staying is a plan and so giving lip service to the notion that he’s moving towards some sort of solution gives him time to, well, stay. He’s not listening to intellectuals or pundits or like anyone who knows anything about the Middle East. He doesn’t have to because in his mind, will is everything.

To get him to change that isn’t about presenting him some great plan for the future, it’s forcing him to get out. Sitting around and trying to be serious about how to responsibly get out of Iraq misses the entire point that the entire misadventure has been enabled by such thinking–including mine early on. It’s not serious to deny the reality of this administration–the reality that Bush and his administration is both deluded and obsessed with winning in Iraq. He’s not looking for a reasonable way out–he’s looking to stay one way or another. Giving him an excuse to stay, only allows this disaster to continue.

There are no good options left in Iraq. There is only tragedy. As Kevin Drum pointed out

Would this be an appalling strategy to follow? Of course it would. Appalling options are all that’s left to us in Iraq.

More to the point: is it worse than the other options at our disposal? Or, alternatively, is it slightly less bad? I’d guess the former: There’s not much question that Shiite forces are eventually going to wipe out the Sunni insurgency, but it’s probably slightly better for them to do it on their own instead of doing it with our active help, something that would alienate every Sunni in the Middle East. And don’t think that we might be able to keep this a secret. Even if our support for this strategy were never publicly acknowledged, there’s not much question that everyone in the region would understand perfectly well what was going on.

Such is the moral calculus we’re left with in Iraq. It’s not a battle between good and bad, it’s a battle between bad and worse.

For those who think that leaving the Sunnis to the mercy of the Shias is some sort of appalling action, you should have thought that out before John Negroponte appeared there. There’s a strange correlation between his presence in a region and death squads bent on killing the opposition. When George Bush decided to follow the advice of the people who turned Central America into multiple killing fields, he decided genocide was the way to solve this problem. He didn’t realize that of course, but he hasn’t realized what an idiotic mistake he has made by invading Iraq at all.

We didn’t stop him then. It’s too late now. It’s a matter of whether American troops are in the middle of that genocide helping it or just getting the hell out.

Wow, a Black Guy From Chicago is Speaking at A Megachurch

ArchPundit November 16, 2006 0 Comment

No, not this guy, that happens every weekend.

This guy. Apparently going to a megachurch is way out there for a black politician.

There’s a certain blindspot in the press about black churches and you know all those Democrats who think religion is icky. Hell, Warren is probably to the left of Meeks on social issues.

Hoyer Wins

ArchPundit November 16, 2006 0 Comment

That’s probably a good thing. While everyone is running around trying to claim Murtha was swiftboated, let’s make this clear–Murtha was not in just one bad situation, but several. I’ll take him at face value on what he says about ABSCAM given how long ago it was, but in recent years he’s been in the pocket of defense contractors and has a friends and families plan going on. Despite his protestations over being willing to back Pelosi’s reform package, he worked with Republicans to kill another plan previously. That’s not an encouraging record.

The main take on Hoyer is that he’s too close to K Street. That’s a problem, but I’m unclear on how that makes Murtha better–Defense lobbyists are on K Street too. At least we don’t get the ABSCAM and friends and family plan added to the problem.

This leaves the only serious problems in Mollohan who I presume is not going to be head of ethics until his case is fully resolved and then the Hastings–Harmon issue where we apparently cannot find anyone who wasn’t impeached or under current investigation to head Intelligence. Really, this isn’t hard stuff people. Both are unsuitable and there are other people who can head up Intelligence. Harmon is probably a better choice in the short term, but if this AIPAC scandal isn’t cleared up soon, she needs to be removed until it is resolved.

Finally, Al Franken has on the challenger to William Jefferson on this morning–remember to help her out. You can also help out with the recount in FL-13 that is a friggen disaster.

Rahm Smarter Than Carville

ArchPundit November 16, 2006 0 Comment

He might disagree with Dean, but he at least gets that Dean is doing a good job even while disagreeing with him.

Carville has decided to take a win and use it to try and divide the party. Dandy, we can’t even get along when we win with this sort of crap.

I think the 50 State Project’s impact on this election is a bit overstated–sort of like the Trib’s slobberfest over Rahm. Both were important, but I don’t think the 50 State project is really showing that much impact yet. We’ll see it have a far greater impact in 2012 after the next redistricting.

I also tend to think the fight over resources wasn’t as clear cut as most in the blogosphere think it was, but I have enough faith in Dean and Rahm to know both were simply trying to do what they were tasked with.

That said, Carville is full of crap. Part of the reason it wasn’t a bigger win is that redistricting has reduced how easily a wave election creates turnover. We are still fighting off the legacy of the 1994 election in state houses. The 50 State Project is going to pay off by giving Democrats more control over redistricting and thus a better ability to hold a majority.

Rahm gets that part of it–remember he’s the one who wanted to do a mid-decade redistricting in Illinois. I am against that, but think that Democrats need to play hardball in Illinois on the next map. Ideally I’d like to see that as leverage for a federal Constitutional Amendment to essentially adapt Iowa’s redistricting process for the nation.

By my look at the Districts, Democrats could flip several seats including 6, 11, 10, and potentially one more. 8 and 17 can be made safe at the same time flipping it from a 10-9 map to a 14-5 map. 17 Can include Peoria, Knox County picking up labor strongholds to reinforce Hare’s seat. 11 Can be rearranged to be more of a South Suburban labor heavy seat. 6, 10, and 8 can be more spoke like to bring in some Democratic voters from Cook County and 10 and 8 can pick up some pockets from 9. Create 15, 18, and 19 to stick as many Republican strongholds down state into those Districts as possible. Then consider taking 14 and including Rockford and use it as a spoke like District from Cook, dumping Manzullo with all the upstate Republican strongholds we can find. That would leave 15, 16, 18, & 19 as Republican with 13 probably picking up the Republican strongholds in mid state. If we lose a seat the likeliest losses are in rural areas which continue to lose population relative to urban/suburban areas so we should be able to squeeze out a Republican in that process if necessary making it 14-4. It also reduces the Republican farm team. Shimkus and Manzullo survive–neither are going anywhere in the state. Weller, Biggert and Johnson all are pretty limited on the upside and they end up fighting over 2 out of 3 Districts if a District is lost.

If Republicans reading it don’t like it–get on the bandwagon to find a non-partisan solution to redistricting like Iowa has.

Can Mr. Smith Get to Washington Anymore? Is one of 15 Documentaries under consideration for an Oscar

ArchPundit November 16, 2006 0 Comment

Congrats Frank, Matt and Mike.

In addition, political and cultural turmoil back in the U.S. is captured in several of the eligible films, including Frank Popper’s “Can Mr. Smith Get to Washington Anymore?” which documents a teacher, Jeff Smith, who ran for a Missouri Senate seat in 2004;

It’ll play in Chicago over Christmas:

December 22, 23, 26, 27, 28 at Facets Cinematheque

It’s really good. And you only see my face for about 2 seconds so don’t let that scare you off.

A Good Reason to Hate the French

ArchPundit November 16, 2006 0 Comment

Apparently the B Sample for Floyd Landis had some problems

An unnamed source confirmed Landis’ claims that the lab had given the wrong number in Landis’ positive B sample, French newspaper Le Monde reported Wednesday.

“The error, of an administrative nature, does not mean the positive B sample was not that of the American,” Le Monde said. “But it is being used today by his lawyers … to contest his positive doping results.”

Landis won the Tour de France in stunning fashion after an astonishing come-back on the final mountain stage of the 2006 Tour, but was later tested positive for excessive testosterone levels during the now infamous ride.

Landis has contested his innocence since the positive was revealed, and last month posted his legal defence in a 300-page report online.

In part of that report the American clamed that the French lab wrote sample numbers on test forms that did not correspond with Landis’ number, then covered over the number with correction fluid and added his own.

The Le Monde story, which comes one day after French officials confirmed they were investigating a hacking into the Chatenay lab’s computer systems, said that the lab wrote the number 994,474 onto the doping form, while Landis’s number was 995,474.

“Even the best people make mistakes,” Landis reiterated to French television on Sunday. “I can’t say that the lab is always a bad lab, but I can say that in this case it made some mistakes … I did not take testosterone.”

So let’s assume the worst that Landis was doping.

We can’t tell because the French lab in question covered up what they claim to be a mistake. If there is no chain of custody the evidence is gone. Given the way these sorts of hearings are held I don’t know if that means Landis will win or not, but he should. Maintaining a chain of custody can occur even with mistakes–you simply document the mistakes assuming it’s a consistent one. Once the mistake is covered up–that’s the end of the usefullness of the chain of custody and the sample.

I was crushed when I learned that Landis was found to have doped. I didn’t say much because I figured he deserved a chance to defend himself. Now, it appears he should be granted the Tour title and reinstated. Even if he was doping we cannot reliably establish that.

And that’s the great tragedy. Landis pulled off one of the truly great performances in the Tour de France and even if cleared, he’ll always live under the suspicion of doping. And because the Tour relies on a lab known for screwing up time and time again, the integrity of the sport cannot be fixed.

In even more fun news, the lab is claimed it was hacked. The evidence–fake e-mails. The most likely scenario of forged e-mails not from the server wasn’t even entertained by the lab.

Friggen geniuses.

But let’s put this in context of the governing bodies in cycling–Landis has to fight for his reputation while the testing lab gets to claim ‘an administrative error’ and get backed up as the victim. Unbelievable.

Americablog says it best

ArchPundit November 15, 2006 0 Comment

Instead of fighting over credit, let’s just be happy and move forward

But today we’re talking about Rahm. The guy is an asshole, to be sure. But he’s our asshole. And it’s about time we had one.

He’s not running DCCC next cycle so let’s start the complaining about the next guy. Get a head start on it before it becomes fashionable.

I loved this too:

“You’ve got to have a thirst for winning,” he said. “You know what our party thinks? `We’re good people with good ideas. That’s just enough, isn’t it?’ Being tough enough, mean enough and vicious enough is just not what they want. . . . They just want to be patted on the back for the noble effort. No.”