2006

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

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

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

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.”

2008 Congressional Elections–Open Thread

Okay, I want some feedback on what people think of the three candidates from this cycle:

Duckworth, Pavich and Seals.

The aim is to get a variety of opinions about the three candidates and their campaigns. From there, there will more open threads about whether to encourage the above candidates, discourage them, and lay out potential candidates for each race if discouraging the last candidate is a good idea.

My point is to evaluate the three of them as candidates in their own right and from that discuss whether they should run again.

I don’t have strong opinions on Duckworth and Pavich at this point, but I’ve already said, I want Seals to run again. In fact, I hope he is already running again. If Kirk loses his mind and shoots for Senate against Durbin in a Blue State in a Presidential year with the next two years looking rocky for Republicans, Seals should win that race. If not, Kirk has a great shot at it anyway. In fact, that might push Kirk up since he might as well shoot big if he’s a top tier target. I’m not discouraging a primary–I generally think they are good things, but it would take an awful lot for me to not back Seals. He’s that good.

People read so take this seriously.

Confusing Famous and Infamous

Red State has Tom DeLay blogging. Next up Conrad Burns and Jack Abramoff.

For the left wing of the left wing–think about how assanine it sounds when Tom DeLay says if we just become more right wing and move from the center we will win elections again. Then think about the mirror image.

Playing only to your base works for a short time in the right circumstances. Like after the worst terrorist attack ever on US soil. However, it only works for so long.

Please Check the Water at the Tribune

Confirm Bolton

Because Asia isn’t adding nuclear nations fast enough. Let’s get Japan to go nuclear!

In the interim, Bolton has proved he doesn’t have horns. In fact, he has answered any questions about whether he has the right temperament and diplomatic skills for the job. He has worked to build consensus on the world’s response to North Korea’s nuclear test, Iran’s nuclear program, the Middle East conflict and genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan.

The Trib should read one of its own properties for why this is one of the most assanine statements ever published by the Tribune including the usual crap by Byrne and Kass.

His record since taking over as ambassador in August 2005 has shown that his adversarial stance toward the institution has not softened. In his first month as U.N. envoy, he gleefully undermined the most comprehensive reform movement in U.N. history by insisting on the adoption of hundreds of irrelevant amendments that were never going to be accepted by the General Assembly.

Later, when the U.N. did agree on one important change — creating a new, reformed Human Rights Council — he argued furiously against it, rallied just three other nations to the cause (out of 191) and eventually saw the U.S. go down to a humiliating defeat. Then he turned around and said he would work with the council and help it financially but not join it. Which left Washington looking not just like a loser, but a whiny one at that. As Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) remarked, Bolton was not just a bully, but an “ineffective” one.

In furtherance of his mission, Bolton also has promoted various pet causes at the institution. For example, when issues of population control or limiting the use of small arms come up, he brings into his office antiabortion activists and National Rifle Assn. members, respectively, to take the other side.

He has, on occasion, reportedly sneaked around his own nominal boss, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, to Vice President Dick Cheney’s office to get support for his own hard-line views at the U.N. — for example, his refusal last summer to endorse the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals aimed at reducing poverty in the developing world. Rice eventually forced him to reverse that stance.

To the extent that he has been able to operate at all at the United Nations — most recently in the Israel-Hezbollah cease-fire — he has had to bow to a new realism within the Bush administration, and yes, sometimes, to international pressure. Even then, though, according to published news reports, he doesn’t get along well with our allies. His bristling nature has left many bruised feelings among his colleagues. His accomplishments are marginal at best. He may be among the most ineffective envoys the United States has ever sent to the U.N.

The man is not only shrill, but stupid. He had the US almost completely shut out of the the peace deal for the Israel-Lebanaon war. He has specifically undermined Rice in attempts to engage Iran–something now being pushed by the Baker Commission.

Confirming John Bolton would only enable the Cheney faction to make more of a hash out of US Foreign Policy than it already has and leaving him at the UN will only mean that any attempt to find a regional solution to Iraq will have to fight a two front war against him and those factions in the Middle East who don’t want any sort of peace. The Trib’s editorial is one of the single most irresponsible and unfathomable editorials ever produced by the Tribune. It is an endorsement of endangering the few alliances we have left, a nuclear arms race in Asia, and continued quagmire in Iraq.

And the Democrats are supposed to go along with the Administration to show responsible bipartisanship.

I’m sorry, but this election was an intervention. Irresponsible bipartisanship–something I took part in at the beginning needs to end. Enabling this Administration to continue a failed foreign policy because it’s good to get along failed miserably already. Denying that failure and asking for more of the same only demonstrates how out of touch with reality are those who continue to view this administration as somehow competent to fix the disasters they have created.

Would the Tribune Rejoin the Reality Based Community Please

hat tip Rich

Kass is spreading Jack Roeser’s conspiracy theory that Bill Brady was a plant by the combine. Worse, he claims Burris was a plant.

Because, you know, Burris never ran before. Like in 1994 and 1998. People may have taken advantage of Burris’ candidacy, but he wanted to win.

Here’s another reason people enter crowded fields–ambition. I’m no fan of Bill Brady other than he was an upgrade to Gordon Ropp’s career crusade for a state soil. Brady is ambitious and he ran a hell of a lot stronger of a campaign than I thought he could. He ran for Congress in 2000 and has been looking to move up the political ladder for some time.

If anything, Brady offered Republicans a chance to actually elect a conservative to statewide office. Oberweis is the Democratic dream candidate. He’s not terribly bright, he makes really dumb decisions, he’s not charismatic, and he’s no where close to the median voter. The only worry about Oberweis was whether he’d actually do worse than Keyes in the percentage of vote.

If the Illinois GOP is going to try and rely on Jack Roeser and friends to bring them back to winning, that’s going to be a long, long wait. In the short term, the numbers for Republicans make winning nearly impossible given the national GOP’s shift to the right. Following that drift isn’t going to help.