The Buck (If We Let You See it) Stops There
The arrogant and worthless Richard Perle emerged blinking into the light on Thursday before the House Armed Services Committee.

Two and a half years ago, he'd derided Wesley Clark in the same venue as "hopelessly confused" for suggesting that it would be better to wait out Saddam Hussein than to attack him ("time is on our side"). Dana Milbank, reporting for the Washington Post ("Same Committee, Same Combatants, Different Tune"):

Perle ... disavowed any responsibility for his confident prewar assertions about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, heaping the blame instead on 'appalling incompetence' at the CIA. 'There is reason to believe that we were sucked into an ill-conceived initial attack aimed at Saddam himself by double agents planted by the regime. And as we now know the estimate of Saddam's stockpile of weapons of mass destruction was substantially wrong.'

There are some Republicans not entirely lost to shame and outrage. Representative Walter B. Jones Jr., for one:

Jones, nearly in tears as he held up Perle's testimony, glared at the witness. 'I went to a Marine's funeral who left a wife and three children, twins he never saw, and I'll tell you, I apologize, Mr. Chairman, but I am just incensed with this statement.'

Earlier, he raged:

"It is just amazing to me how we as a Congress were told we had to remove this man . . . but the reason we were given was not accurate," Jones told Perle at a House Armed Services Committee hearing. Jones said the administration should "apologize for the misinformation that was given. To me there should be somebody who is large enough to say 'We've made a mistake.' I've not heard that yet."

Meanwhile, Stygius has been following the John Bolton nomination fight just about as closely as Steve Clemons has. (Stygius has been posting one of the best blogs anywhere lately, IMO.) An item of his about Bolton's involvement in promoting the false Niger-uranium procurement claim caught my attention. Bolton urged Secretary of State Colin Powell to ask, "The Declaration ignores efforts to procure uranium from Niger. Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?" in his famous U.N. briefing. The kicker, if any were needed, is that the State Department has tried to pretend Bolton's advice is important classified information.

Looks to me like the Bush administration stance is that "We want to keep our lies secret, and blame our failures on somebody else."

What's more, if Jones' comments to Perle and Bolton's shaky support among Republicans like Chafee, Hagel, and Domenici are any indication, some of the few remaining grown-up Republicans in Washington are considering putting an end to that. We'll see if they have the guts to do it.

=====
NOTES: (1) As Stygius points out, Steve Clemons is making Bolton his topic A lately; here's his latest post. I'm somewhat surprised that opposition is stronger to Bolton than to, say, Gonzales, but that's life. If a good nomination fight or even a defeat lights a fire under this administration's butt about nonproliferation and threat reduction (the effort to secure or buy up uranium and plutonium stocks in the former Soviet Union) it will be OK with me. Bolton has had an all but destructively passive attitude towards arms control, his nominal bailiwick at the State Department.
(2) I should acknowledge that I got after Dana Milbank for his supercilious article about bloggers the other week. He's done a lot of good reporting lately; maybe he should stick to that line of work and spare us his deep thoughts on journalism per se. posted by Thomas Nephew at 3:30:00 PM -- |    

 
Remnant Population
If some book other than Remnant Population wins this year's Hugo Award for best science fiction novel, it will be very good indeed. The story by Elizabeth Moon is a great first contact story (i.e., first contact with another intelligent species) with an anti-heroine for the sci-fi ages: Sera Ofelia, a colonist ornery enough to gladly wave good-bye to her fellow colonists when the home office evicts them all, and self-assured enough to shove a mop into the paws of the first creature that tracks water into her home. Ursula K. Le Guin offers this cover blurb: "Ofelia -- tough, kind, wise, fond of food, tired of foolish people -- is one of the most probable heroines science fiction has ever known."

As I was completing the book, I thought that this is in a way a perfect complement and response to one of my other favorite science fiction first-contact books, The Mote in God's Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Will first contact, if it happens, be threat or opportunity, and how hard will it be to tell? It may depend, it seems, on who does the contacting.

We now return to our regular blogging topics. posted by Thomas Nephew at 2:00:00 PM -- |    

 
DeLay support waning
Earlier today I came across a nice little article by Nicholas Thompson at Slate: The Tom DeLay Scandals: A scorecard. Mr. Thompson has developed a handy-dandy "Stench" and "Trouble" rating system for the various political garbage truck wrecks Tom DeLay has got himself into, from TRMPAC to "fixing" the House Ethics Committee to the particularly pungent Abramoff/gambling connection.

It's a decent roundup of the DeLay stories, and worth your while. What I mean to point out here, though, is that it comes to me via a rare trip over to the Ole Perfessor himself. Naturally, the Glennmeister does a expert bit of political positioning by (a) edging on board the anti-DeLay bandwagon and (b) affecting boredom about it:

"I HAVEN'T PAID MUCH ATTENTION to the various Tom DeLay scandals -- there are so many! But here's a roundup from Slate."

Similarly, Brett Marston notices Southern Appeal blogger Nathan Hallford commenting

Seriously, just how much longer do we have to put up with Rep. Tom DeLay? Today's Times includes an article titled "DeLay Says Federal Judiciary Has 'Run Amok,' Adding Congress Is Partly to Blame." Granted, he says congress is part of the problem, but overall, this guy scares me.

Again, a conflicted message -- the "federal judiciary" is conceded to be a "problem", but DeLay's statement of that is suddenly uncool: "run amok" is scarier than the usual "activist judge" cant.

But it's significant that some rightish blog influentsia eare now cutting DeLay loose, even if they're still unwilling to concede there's a deeper problem.* But I think there's a solid underpinning of disdain about his assorted corruption and other scandals.

That's one reason I welcome the "New Face of American Conservatism?" anti-DeLay ad in the right-wing Washington Times. In a very interesting post picking up on my mention of the ad, Stygius points out:

This media campaign is a dry run for the 2006 elections, as well as a way turn Tom DeLay into the national bogeyman that Newt Gingrich ultimately became. This is a way to try out different media tactics and new ideas without overtly agitating against the GOP as a whole.

His post made me take a closer look at the ad -- and I like it even better now. While Stygius admires its head-on targeting of the conservative flagship readership, and the willingness to experiment, I like the ad itself as well. It speaks to that sense of disgust without being strident -- a "more in sorrow than in anger" approach that is wickedly effective, I think.

At any rate, it's not Democrats back on their heels these days. That's nice for a change -- I just hope they can do themselves some good with this opportunity.


=====
* DeLay wasn't the only nutball at the conference hosting DeLay's "run amok" remark. An aide to the equally nutty Tom Coburn advocated mass impeachment of judges.

UPDATE, 4/9: More on the "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith" conference in today's Washington Post ("And The Verdict on Justice Kennedy Is: Guilty"). Sure enough, Phyllis Schlafly was on hand, too. One conservative approvingly quoted Stalin's "No man, no problem" dictum -- leaving out the "Death solves all problems:" prologue, as Dana Milbank points out. Today's right: like Stalin, just more to the point! posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:29:00 AM -- |    

 
Coalition for Darfur
Returning readers will notice a new pro bono ad for "Save The Children" in the sidebar; please click through and send some money to help care for children affected by the Darfur genocide in the Sudan.

I've joined a number of other blogs as a member of the Coalition for Darfur, and plan to post more about this issue. On Wednesday coalition co-founder Eugene Oregon* appealed for more support:

We are all aware of the central role that blogs played in the "60 Minutes" and "Jeff Gannon" stories and we know that blogs have to power to propel forgotten stories into the mainstream media. The Coalition for Darfur is an effort to unite blogs of all political ideologies in an attempt to raise awareness of the ongoing genocide in Darfur and raise money for organizations doing life-saving work there.

Though the country is deeply polarized, we think that the effort to stop this genocide is something that can unite people of varying political and religious beliefs.

While exact figures are hard to come by, it's certain that tens of thousands and likely that hundreds of thousands of people are being slaughtered or are succumbing to disease and hardship at the hands of the Sudanese government and their "Janjaweed" militia henchmen. Mr. Oregon cites a mid-March Washington Post article ("In Darfur, My Camera Was Not Nearly Enough") by Brian Steidle, an ex-Marine and U.S. military observer for the African Union. Excerpts:

Every day we surveyed evidence of killings: men castrated and left to bleed to death, huts set on fire with people locked inside, children with their faces smashed in, men with their ears cut off and eyes plucked out, and the corpses of people who had been executed with gunshots to the head. We spoke with thousands of witnesses -- women who had been gang-raped and families that had lost fathers, people who plainly and soberly gave us their accounts of the slaughter. [...]

The Janjaweed militias do not act alone. I have seen clear evidence that the atrocities committed in Darfur are the direct result of the Sudanese government's military collaboration with the militias. Attacks are well coordinated by Sudanese government officials and Arab militias, who attack villages together. Before these attacks occur, the cell phone systems are shut down by the government so that villagers cannot warn each other. Whenever we lost our phone service, we would scramble to identify the impending threat. We knew that somewhere, another reign of terror was about to begin.

Helicopter gunships belonging to the government routinely support the Arab militias on the ground. The gunships fire anti-personnel rockets that contain flashettes, or small nails, each with stabilizing fins on the back so the point hits the target first. Each gunship contains four rocket pods, each rocket pod contains about 20 rockets and each rocket contains about 500 of these flashettes. Flashette wounds look like shotgun wounds. I saw one small child's back that looked as if it had been shredded by a cheese grater. We got him to a hospital, but we did not expect him to live.

Steidle doesn't think the situation is hopeless:

I believe this conflict can be resolved through international pressure and international support of the African Union. Weapons sanctions and a no-fly zone throughout Darfur are critical. I have seen that the mere presence of A.U. forces can discourage attacks and, with more support, they could stop the conflict.

I believe in the value of insisting "never again" -- so I'm pretty late to this. I think it's important to recognize there's a lot that the United States can do short of U.S. "boots on the ground" military intervention. Given the load we've imposed on ourselves in Iraq, that's a good thing.

But there's a bloody, shooting genocide underway right now that must be stopped right now. I support well-chosen U.S. assistance -- e.g., financial support, radar planes to monitor no-fly zones, and logistical support -- to African nations intervening to stop that genocide. I support the United States making opposition to the Darfur genocide their primary diplomatic effort at the United Nations.

=====
* The founding of the coalition is a nice instance of cooperation across the ideological divide. From the Coalition for Darfur's first post: "A Southern conservative and a Northern liberal have teamed up to raise awareness about the genocide in Darfur, Sudan and money for a worthy organization doing vital work there: Save the Children." (links added) posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:45:00 PM -- |    

 
Same old face of the Washington Times
Washington Times front page headline, April 7: Martinez says his aide produced Schiavo memo

Washington Times editorial cartoon, April 7: an editorial cartoon by Bill Garner titled "The Memo Mill" shows a grinning donkey walking away while a street sweeper walks behind pushing a garbage can with "Dan Rather memo... Schiavo memo" odors coming out of it.

The Schiavo memo referred to here was distributed on the Senate floor during the debate whether to intervene in the Schiavo case; it stated that "This is a great political issue... this is a tough issue for Democrats." Today Josh Marshall singled out for special scorn "the almost criminally fatuous commentators and reporters who wrote up stories suggesting the memo was actually a dirty trick by the Democrats." The Washington Times deserves special mention for continuing to do so when they already knew better.

Thus, "Campaign for America's Future" couldn't have picked a better day to run a full page ad on page 5 of the Washington Times. Asking "The New Face of American Conservatism?", the ad compares Tom DeLay to Eisenhower, Goldwater, and Reagan and describes his corrupt, butt-insky variety of conservatism, concluding

Once, conservatives had higher standards for their leaders.

Maybe. I'm not sure they ever did for their newspapers. posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:30:00 PM -- |    

 
HA! Maryland legislators end Wal-Mart freeloading
Last week I mentioned that Maryland legislators were considering a "Fair Share Health Care" bill requiring large businesses to spend an amount equal to 8% of payroll on health benefits, making up the difference in contributions to a state fund earmarked for Medicaid.

They did it! The Washington Post's John Wagner and Michael Barbaro report ("Md. Passes Rules on Wal-Mart Insurance"):

Maryland lawmakers yesterday approved legislation that would effectively require Wal-Mart to boost spending on health care, a direct legislative thrust against a corporate giant that is already on the defensive on many fronts nationwide.

They add that Governor Ehrlich is likely to veto the measure -- but that both Maryland House and Senate majorities are likely veto-proof (some absent votes in the House are probably supporters). The Maryland Senate adopted some last minute amendments, but they don't seem to have provided Wal-Mart (or would-be imitators) with a full-time employees-only loophole to avoid meeting the 10,000 employee threshold.*

If this goes through, the impact on Wal-Mart operations in Maryland could be interesting. If there's no strong financial advantage to part-time employees, Wal-Mart might decide to go to a full-time employment model to reduce turnover and training costs. I suspect that could bring benefits of its own to communities and workers. While it's been suggested they may downsize to get around the 10,000 mark, that seems like a stretch at their current level of over 14,000 Maryland employees.

Almost as interesting and encouraging as the news itself is the front page, above-the-fold treatment it got in the Post. Given room to expand on the topic, Wagner and Barbaro have made the article a one-stop shopping spot drawing attention to a number of other initiatives aimed at Wal-Mart. Familiar ones included the UFCW ABC News campaign and the Wal-Mart Fact Checker. But the Wal-Mart Litigation Project is a new one to me, I think I'll check them out -- thanks WaPo!


=====
* To be honest, my eyes glazed over trying to interpret the amendments, so I'm basing my guess that part-time workers count too on the absence of loud squawks from Maryland Health Care for All initiative -- who apparently deserve huge praise and support for this success. They provide a succinct summary of the bill and its value to the public on their web site. The pull quote is particularly good:

All we ask for, and what we need, is a 'level playing field' where every employer pays their fair share, and where a company's competitive advantage is achieved by means other than avoiding the provision of medical care coverage and shifting the costs towards those companies who do provide that coverage.
-- Dick Baird, CEO, Giant Food, Baltimore Business Journal, 2003

I plan to use that in my letter to Governor Ehrlich urging him not to veto this bill. I also plan to e-mail a letter of thanks to my state senators and delegates who supported this bill. posted by Thomas Nephew at 5:03:00 PM -- |    

 
End of textile quota system has predictable effect
The New York Times' David Barboza reports that "Stream of Chinese Textile Imports Is Becoming a Flood"*:

Imports of Chinese textile and apparel products into the United States soared in the first quarter, offering fresh evidence that the world's clothing trade is being drastically reshaped by the abolition of global quotas in January. [...]

Analysts are now predicting a surge in Chinese textile and apparel exports to the rest of the world that could wipe out production in some poorer countries, like Bangladesh and Cambodia. Some analysts believe Chinese imports could eventually account for as much as 70 percent of America's textile and apparel imports. [...]

There are still about 665,000 textile and apparel manufacturing jobs in America, according to textile officials. But most specialists say they think those jobs are likely to vanish within a few years.

Last week, the National Council of Textile Organizations said that 17,000 American jobs had already been lost this year after 11 textile and apparel plants were closed because they could not compete. (emphases added)

I wrote about the end of the "Multifibre Agreement" (MFA) and followon "Agreement on Textiles and Clothing" (ATC) quota systems back in January -- that is, I linked to a very good series by the L.A. Times describing the global impact of the end of MFA/ATC. It's really pretty simple; if all that matters is price, nothing else matters -- labor rights, the environment, living wage jobs, community stability -- either in the U.S. or overseas. Barboza gets the suitable quote:

"We will always go to the least expensive place," said Roger Williams, president of Warnaco Swimwear, a division of Warnaco, one of the world's biggest apparel makers. "Once the issue of safeguards is settled, our comfort level will go up. There will be a shift to China over time."**

He's not talking about worker safety; he just means he's hedging his China bet with other overseas manufacturing bases with working conditions that are often no better (but sometimes are). His and our comfort level with clothing made under exploitative conditions needs to change.

This is as good a time as any to mention that I recently bought a pair of jeans and a denim shirt online from Union Jean and Apparel -- "100% Union Made in the USA." Both are very good quality, and decently priced. Give them a shot. (Act now! Place an order for $75 and receive a FREE T-shirt! :)

If they don't have what you need, check out the list of other "sweatshop-free" clothing retailers at NoSweatApparel.com or SweatshopWatch.org.


=====
* Via Jonathan Tasini ("Working Life")
** UPDATE, 4/6: I'm learning this stuff as I go. "Safeguards" turn out to be a term of art in international trade law, at least for textiles. For example, last October a coalition of U.S. manufacturers and labor petitioned for safeguards for a variety of clothing articles. As the link explains, once the U.S. interagency " Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements" (CITA) receives the petition it has 15 days to rule on it. If accepted, World Trade Organization( WTO) agreements say that the US can limit China (in this case) to 7.5% annual growth if no agreement is reached. posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:15:00 AM -- |    

 
Bankruptcy bill: prevent closed rule debate
Via Bob Fertik, it looks like the game will be over before it begins if the Republican leadership pulls their usual trick of calling for "closed rule" debate on bankruptcy bill. The vote on rules for the bill is scheduled for Tuesday, 5pm EST. "Closed rule" debate would mean no one could offer amendments to the bill undoing or mitigating its worst features.

The "DebtSlavery.org" coalition has a "action kit" with phone numbers of Republicans in the Rules Committee:

DAVID DREIER, CA – CHAIRMAN (202)-225-2305
LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART, FL (202)-225-4211
DOC HASTINGS, WA (202)-225-5816
PETE SESSIONS, TX (202)-225-2231
ADAM PUTNAM, FL (202)-225-1252
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, WV (202)-225-2711
TOM COLE, OK (202)-225-6165
ROB BISHOP, UT (202)-225-0453
PHIL GINGREY, GA (202)-225-2931

Another "kit" is a decent summary of the issue in the form of an e-mail. An excerpt:

Unexpected medical expenses have crushed half of all families who file for bankruptcy. Another 40 percent have suffered the death of a family breadwinner, lost a job, or divorced.

Our current bankruptcy law gives these families a chance to get back on their feet, without losing everything. Under this current system, a judge looks at a family's actual income and expenses and has the ability to distinguish between a debtor whose child has diabetes and a debtor who's gone on reckless shopping sprees.

Under the bankruptcy "reform" bill before the House, judges would no longer be able to make these crucial distinctions. Courts would have to apply arbitrary "means testing" formulas for expenses like rent, regardless of what a family's rent might actually be.

This is legislation of Dickensian smugness and cruelty. So give some of these people a piece of your mind. This isn't about responsibility, it's about greed. As Robert Scheer points out:

...for all of the whining about deadbeats ripping off the system, credit card companies' annual pretax profits have soared two-and-a-half times in the last decade, and last year was their most profitable in more than fifteen years.

(via the Nation's Peter Rothberg)

=====
NOTE: Selected other posts on this issue -- In peonage to Nosferatu; Bankruptcy bill hackery and its sequel.
UPDATE, 4/5: House Bankruptcy Bill Votes Miraculously Postponed: A "Raw Story" update says the Wednesday House vote on the bankruptcy bill has been postponed until next week, "likely because of members' desires to attend the Pope's funeral." Maybe they'll hear that rich man, heaven, camel, eye of needle thing while they're in Rome. The update is actually just window dressing to a superb 54-page dissenting view on the bankruptcy bill by the Democratic House Judiciary Staff. I don't know what's happened with the Rules Committee yet....
UPDATE, 4/5: The Rules Committee vote scheduled for 5 pm is postponed until further notice." Mysterious ways indeed. posted by Thomas Nephew at 10:05:00 PM -- |