The Continuing Decline Of Western Civilization

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are so throwing you a shower

I havn't mentioned either of these things recently, but that's not because I havn't been thinking about them. Time constraints have prevented the proper write-up necessary, but while it's still in the news: Iran, what I think and links. Followed by Hamas's wins in the Palestinian elections.

Iran genuinely wants to have civilian nuclear power, it's not just a hoax. I can't speak to the economics of it, but I think that this is true. Also, its not prohibited by any on the non-poliferation treaties or agreements that Iran is involved in. We can't stop them, legally.

It's also distinctly possible that they want to develop a bomb, and we would be fools to ignore that. However, Iran having the bomb would not be the end of the world. They have good reasons for wanting one (from the Iranian perspective), not the least of which are US threats (and two neighbooring invasions). We can't know Iran's intentions (they may not even know their intentions, but giving one away to an ally, much less to an uncontrolable terrorist organization seems unlikely. The situation with the Pakistani bomb is far more dangerous, proof being the scientist/spy.

People who are discussing bombing raids/invasion to prevent this from happening are insane. If you really want the populace to rally around the hard-liners and make Iran ten times more dangerous, this is the best way to go. I'm leaning towards thinking that if the choice is between military strikes (which may or may not be effective) or Iran having the bomb, Iran having the bomb might be the safest option.

To the links (which focus on the big picture, not necessarily individual events):

US intelligence agencies think Iran is ten years away from developing a bomb.

Another on Iran's development timetable.

A vital part of any discussion of the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran: it's missle capabilities.

Most important to the hawks, can we stop them with a military strike?

Who controls Iran's nuclear program?

What does it mean for Iran to 'get the bomb'?

How does the NPT and our role in it fit in?

What are Iran's diplomatic options?

What can we know about the consequences of Iran possesing the bomb?

Lastly, an introduction to the topic.

Yeah, so I didn't really want to jump in feet-first.

On to Hamas. The Palestinians did not necessarily vote for a terrorist organization, nor did they vote for the destruction of Israel. They voted for an organization that has been demonstratably non-corrupt (Fatah was extremely corrupt) and one which spends 90% of it's time and money in charitable causes which have proven quite effective. This post by hilzoy is very long, but demonstrates quite well the mixed situation. Incidently, Israel has been acting as if the peace process is dead anyway, so this changes very little on the score.

And Israel is an occupying force which is doing to the Palestinians what the Romans did to them.

But can someone please explain to me what people mean when they say that Hamas is now going to have to figure out how to deal with 'reality'?

posted by tcdowc - 8:57 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Linkity link link links

From the LA Times, the new Medicare program provides for IV drugs, but not for the IV equipment. Hospitals and pharmacists are overwhelmed.

Via Knight-Ridder, the DoJ thought that FISA was working well in 2002, and that any attempts to overhaul it to make warrants easier for the NSA to get would require 'a significant review', which helped motivate Congress to not modify the law.

For some reason, Bush has nominated a key prosecutor in the Abramoff case to a District Court seat. Hmm.

Also from Knight-Ridder, we are doing things right in the WOT. Amazingly, being nice does the trick.

Mozart turns 250.

Canadian record label Nettwork,home to Auteur de Lucie (who are awesome), Avirl Lavigne (she writes her own songs), Barenaked Ladies (pretentious and boring), and several other acts is going to bat against the RIAA.

This is funny, but requires specialized knowledge.

Neat thing on convergent evolution between dinosaurs and crocodiles.

Astro-turf blogger claims Brokeback Mountain (check out our review!) is treasonous.

The Poor Man breaks down the 'new' info on the NSA wiretaps.

That's enough for now.

posted by tcdowc - 5:59 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I close my eyes, you can't see me!

Yet more cases of the blind leading the stupid. Since the government clearly can't do anything right (seriously, why would anyone vote for someone who really believes that whatever endeavors the government gets into are doomed to fail? We depend on the government to do some things correctly, yet people still get elected who think that the government can't do anything right. It boggles my mind) the TSA has decided to out-source airport security. That's right, for an additional fee (TBD by whatever outfit you sign on with) it's possible that you can have shorter lines or quicker access to planes or something else entirely. When I was thirteen, I thought that there should be 'me only' lines too, I'm glad that the TSA is catching up with me. I've read about a lot of dumb things in my time, but this is really really stupid. I've adapted Hannibal's points into a nifty list.

a: airline security will now be subject to free-market behaviors. Don't think this is bad? Wait till the share-holders start screaming for higher profits.
b: the TSA can and will change your benefits randomly. To fight terrorism. Because terrorists are easily confused.
c: more people have access to your data.
d: identity theft, it's not just for theives anymore. Don't be surprised if you spend a few years in GITMO after being impersonnated.
e: more pork for friends of Republicans!

There are other problems as well, such as space and the longer resulting lines for those of us without the ability to pay off security, but if you're gonna fuck things up, you've got to really fuck them up good.

Oh, and CIFA is spying on us domestically too. They're checking up on anti-military terrorist activity in the US. I may have mentioned this before in passing, but its in Newsweek so I thought I'd add it on. There's a 90-day limit on retaining information gleaned from this type of domestic survailence, and apparently that limit is being ignored. So who are they monitoring you ask? I'm glad you asked that. Protesters. Hannibal puts the case succiently:

Truly, if you're secretly plotting to commit acts of terrorism against the American military, among the first things you'll do are stage a public protest outside a military recruitment office and/or put up an anti-government web page. I believe that's on the first slide of the Al Qaeda "So You Want to Be a Terrorist" PowerPoint presentation. It's in the section titled, "On the importance of blending in with local radicals, dissidents, and other persons likely to be targeted by the feds."

posted by tcdowc - 5:05 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The King Is Dead, Long Live The King

Fafblog has an interview with our infallible leader, which reveals much about the legality of the NSA wiretaps.

Q. Is the president above the law?
A. Nobody's above the law! As commander-in-chief the president just outranks the law.
Q. So the president doesn't break the law. He just appoints new laws to fill vacancies in the office of law, as empowered by Acticle II of the Shmonstitution!
A. In the presidential order of succession the law falls between Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings and Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson.

Andrew Sullivan confirms that this is in fact the case. Bush's use of 'signing statements', memos that a President can attach to any legislation he signs, is significantly more common than any previous President's, but how he uses them is far different as well. As an example, Sullivan cites the statement that Bush attached to the McCain amendment that outlawed torture:

He issued a signing statement that read, "The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power."

Translation: If the President believes torture is warranted to protect the country, he'll violate the law and authorize torture. If the courts try to stop him, he'll ignore them too.

If you don't think that this is a serious thing, you're an idiot. The President is vagrantly saying that the law only applies to him when he says it does. But that's okay, because he has legal back-up! Yes, the current leading architect of this theory is our new Justice-to-be, Sammy Alito. Not content with undermining Roe v. Wade and anti-discrimination legislation, Sammy thinks that, well, let him speak for himself:

Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress.

That's right, the law should give equal legislative weight to the Executive branch. As Scott Lemieux points out:

Within the Madisonian separation-of-powers framework the concept of authoritative Presidential statements of intent is nonsensical. What Alito is advocating isn't adapting broad constitutional principles to modern realities; it's just a different set of principles entirely.

It's nice that Alito is intelligent, well regarded in legal circles, whatever, but I'd rather have an illiterate (small d) democrat than a royalist on the bench any day.

posted by tcdowc - 4:36 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Study the Ancients Abroad in Picturesque Detroit!

This is pretty cool, an online photo tour of the ruins of Detriot. Many of these buildings and sites were captured for posterity just before demolition. Check it out.

posted by tcdowc - 4:34 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shocking!

Ehh, so I'm lazy, and all my news is old. Anyway, its official, Republicans run this shit however they want. The GOP excluded Democrats from the conference committee that was sorting out the differences between a House and Senate version of a Medicare bill that would have changed the formula for reimbursement to insurance providers. What was the bit that they changed you ask? I'm glad you asked. The HMOs attract healthier seniors than average. So we pay them less. Or we would have, except that the Administration blocked it, so that they continue to make more than they should. So this bill was going to attack the problem at its source, where hospitals and doctors employed by the HMOs 'up-code' their patients to make them seem more sick than they actually are. The bill would have enacted mandatory yearly accounting of this 'coding-creep'. The industry denies it exists, but has fought like hell to keep from having to prove this. The conference committee limited this yearly accounting to three years, instead of indefinitly. The CBO says that this will cost the government 22 billion versus the original version. Can you say kick-back?

posted by tcdowc - 4:14 pm - 01.27.06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

previous - next