Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Harman’s Magic Act

by dday

By a twist of fate, Jane Harman actually appeared at the AIPAC convention over the weekend, bringing full circle the recent controversy over her comments picked up on a wiretap offering help to get AIPAC staffers out of a Justice Department probe in exchange for help getting the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee. She vowed to begin a crusade against illegal wiretapping and overreach from the surveillance state.

Harman has described the wiretap as an abuse of government power. But sources have told The Washington Post that she was not being surveilled; the tapped phone belonged to the suspected Israeli agent, who happened to talk to her.

“I will not quit on this until I am absolutely sure this can never happen to anyone else,” Harman told the AIPAC audience, which warmly applauded her. She said the incident was having “a chilling effect” on members of Congress who “care intensely about the U.S.-Israeli security relationship . . . and have every right to talk to advocacy groups.”

Later, she called herself a “warrior on behalf of our Constitution and against abuse of power”. Which, coming from Harman, is utterly absurd, a magic act where she transforms herself from a vigorous defender of executive prerogatives on wiretapping to a civil liberties zealot who wants to take down the surveillance state.

Jane Harman is a warrior on behalf of the Constitution and against abuse of power — that’s the same Jane Harman who tried to bully The New York Times out of writing about Bush’s illegal spying program, who succeeded in pressuring them not to publish their story until after Bush was re-elected, who repeatedly proclaimed the program to be “legal and necessary” once it was revealed, who called the whistle-blowers “despicable”, who went on Meet the Press and expressed receptiveness to a criminal investigation of The New York Times for publishing the story, who led the way in supporting the Fourth-Amendment-gutting and safeguard-destroying FISA Amendments Act of 2008, and who demanded that telecoms be retroactively immunized for breaking multiple laws by allowing government spying on their customers without warrants of any kind.

That is who is a self-proclaimed “warrior on behalf of our Constitution and against abuse of power.”

As Atrios notes, Jane Harman is primarily concerned about wiretapping of People Named Jane Harman. And her point that this represented a potential abuse of government power, which by the way is
entirely plausible, was the entire point of people like me when we decried an illegal wiretapping program that would be ripe for abuse. You know, the one Jane Harman defended.

Worse, in the “Fact Sheet” Harman is sending around to supporters in the district, she characterizes herself as, among other things, a longtime critic of warrantless wiretapping in the most fantastical way possible:

• Harman has never supported so-called “warrantless wiretaps” on Americans. “We must use all lawful tools to detect and disrupt the plans of our enemies; signals intelligence and the work of the NSA are vital to that mission. But in doing so, it is also vital that we protect the American people’s constitutional rights.” (Press release of Dec. 21, 2005 — four days after the President declassified the existence of the Terrorist Surveillance Program).

• Harman introduced the LISTEN Act (H.R. 5371) with House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers to add resources to the Justice Department to ensure the issuance of individualized warrants under FISA. (Press release of May 11, 2006).

• Harman, Senator Obama, and Speaker Pelosi supported amendments to FISA to expand protections to US citizens, and give limited court-reviewed immunity to telecommunications firms that prove they relied in good faith on what they believed was a valid order to produce records. (Vote date of June 20, 2008).

She must think we’re all idiots. That vote of June 20, 2008, the amendments to FISA to “expand protections to US citizens,” in addition to providing retroactive immunity for the telecoms for breaking the law, actually granted sweeping new powers to the federal government, including the ability to “conduct mass, untargeted surveillance of all communications coming into and out of the United States, without any individualized review, and without any finding of wrongdoing.” The fact that this lack of oversight or judicial review could lead to abuses of surveillance power has been confirmed by reports that the NSA overstepped its legal authority to wiretap by intercepting the private emails and phone calls of Americans, problems which grew “out of changes enacted by Congress last July in the law that regulates the government’s wiretapping powers.” The fact that Barack Obama supported that bill, considering that he was massively criticized by progressives for that FISA vote, doesn’t exactly help the cause.

Harman’s record on wiretapping is well-known and her efforts to wiggle out of it are frankly laughable. And the rest of her record, as demonstrated by Swing State Project today, shows her to be among the top 20 Democrats voting less liberal than what their districts would support. That, more than this hypocrisy on civil liberties, is why she’ll draw a primary challenge next year, should she choose to run again.

.

SIFFting Through Celluloid Is Back On

by digby

As some of you know, over the week-end I asked that readers politely let the Seattle International Film Festival know that you value Dennis Hartley’s reviews and that you would like them to kindly reconsider their denial of a press credential for him to do his work. I’m thrilled to report that they have changed their minds as a result of the outpouring of support for Dennis’ work:

Dear Digby,

Thanks so very much for bringing this to our attention. After reading all
of the letters we received over the weekend from your readers, we can
certainly ascertain that Mr. Hartley¹s reviews are read around the country,
by a loyal and passionate following. Based on this additional information
and further research, we have decided to reverse our initial decision and
will be extending press credentials to Mr. Hartley for SIFF 2009. We have
reached out to Mr. Hartley this morning to inform him personally.

I do want to assure you and your readers that we recognize the importance of
blogs and have many bloggers on our press list. We do our best in
researching all those who approach us, accrediting those with legitimate
blogs and healthy readerships. Of course, as a film festival, we are paying
most attention to those blogs that focus on film, entertainment, and pop
culture. We did not understand the impact of Mr. Hartley¹s Saturday film
reviews on what is first and foremost a political blog.

We¹re delighted to learn that so many of your readers take great interest in
independent and international film. It¹s heartening to know that, through
Mr. Hartley¹s work, readers around the world can learn a little about SIFF
and a lot about the excellent filmmakers we work so hard to showcase.

Thanks again,

Deborah

Thank you all very much for taking the time to ask them and thanks very much to Deborah Person for responding with such generosity and openness. Believe me, a lot of people wouldn’t have done that and Dennis and I both appreciate it very much.

Like the Drinking/Laughing/Living Liberally concept, I think supporting independent film, music and art is an area where we can consolidate our political/social culture a bit and I’m glad that this blog is able to contribute a little bit to that effort with Dennis’ film critiques and tristero’s world renowned music. It’s a good thing.

Left Behind

by digby

This is nice:

“The Democratic Party is geographically rich and ideologically variegated,” Reid writes. “Our many voices is the source of our strength. Sometimes, some on the left in our party don’t seem to understand this.”

And some on the right seem to feel they have veto power over the majority.

The article from which that’s lifted discusses an essay Reid has written explaining his decision to allow Lieberman to stay in the caucus. He recounts the defection of Ben Nighthorse Campbell from the Democrats in 1994 as the object lesson in never allowing the left to pressure a right wing Democrat lest they leave the party. It’s a funny lesson, considering the fact that Nighthorse Campbell said at the time that he left the party because Bill Clinton’s economic policies were too liberal and he resented the fact that he was asked to stay loyal to the party. In fact, he was quoted later saying he “only wished he’d made the change years earlier.” If Reid really thinks that he should have been accommodated so that Clinton’s economic plan would fail, he’s one hell of a leader.

Nighthorse Campbell left the Senate in 2004 after voting enthusiastically for Bush’s tax cuts. But one does wonder how much he enjoyed his independence under the Bush administration’s iron hand, which made any arm twisting Bill Clinton ever did look like child’s play. The fact is that Nighthorse Campbell was riding the 1994 Republican Revolution wave, just like a whole bunch of other craven opportunists who wanted to surf with Newtie the superstar. It was a fashion statement.

It’s pretty clear that the Democratic leadership still has an irrational fear of the DFHs, and it is irrational. Nothing “the left” is arguing for is out of the mainstream of American thought. Indeed, what “the left” wants is what President Obama and the Democratic Party ran on.

Yet, Lieberman went out on the trail with John McCain and said President Obama wasn’t qualified. Specter is changing parties not for reasons of conscience, but because he can’t win a primary as a Republican because they are batshit insane and the Dems apparently gave away the store. Most telling about all this is that with the exception of Jeffords, all recent party switchers made sure to win their elections with Democratic Party money. Both Shelby and Nighthorse Campbell switched right after they had run as Democrats and now Specter is switching ahead of the race so that he can win with Dem Party money as well. Lieberman left the party after he lost a primary and he won with Party backing anyway and then repeatedly and openly stabbed presidential its nominee in the back as often as possible.

What a great scam. But I do have to wonder why anyone, left, right or center, gives money to the party when its obviously expects absolutely nothing in return? It’s a bad bargain.

Update: I do love the fact that Politico reporter helped Reid formulate his rationale for all this.

Put most simply: The Campbell lesson helped keep Lieberman, Lieberman helped get Collins, Collins helped bring along Specter. Finally, the same type of party extremes that led Campbell to switch then drove Specter to jump.

“I hadn’t thought of it that way,” Reid said in response. “But that’s right. That’s good.”

That’s very cute. Nighthorse Campbell won his election with the full support of the rank and file of the party and a ton of Democratic money and then refused to support the party and left shortly after the election. And it’s exactly the same as Specter, who failed to get the support of the rank and file voters and the Republican Party and only moved to the Democrats so he could take their money and block a real Democrat from winning the seat. Got it.

Could Have Lifted A Finger

by dday

The New York Times takes notice of White House silence in the wake of Sen. Durbin’s failure on cramdown.

The Obama administration sat by last week as 12 Senate Democrats joined 39 Senate Republicans to block a vote on an amendment that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to modify troubled mortgages.

Senator Obama campaigned on the provision. And President Obama made its passage part of his antiforeclosure plan. It would have been a very useful prod to get lenders to rework bad loans rather than leaving the modification to a judge.

But when the time came to stand up to the banking lobbies and cajole yes votes from reluctant senators — the White House didn’t. When the measure failed, there wasn’t even a statement of regret.

Digby has mentioned the coming second wave of ARM recasts and accompanying foreclosures, not to mention the acceleration of foreclosures brought on by mounting job loss. As Durbin said in his floor speech, when he first offered up the cramdown option 2 million homes were threatened by foreclosure. Now we’re looking at 8 million, and nobody should expect that number to go down the next time the very serious Senate kills the provision. The Times estimates that 14 million homeowners are underwater on their mortgages. As Atrios says today, “I don’t want to hear any of this ‘nobody could have predicted’ crap from Larry and Timmeh.”

With opposition that strong, I’m not sure the President could have brought around all twelve Democrats who voted no to his side. But they might have given it a try. Because it’s clear now that the best tool for dealing with the second-order foreclosure crisis, which will affect the banks and the greater economy in an exponential way, is lost for the near future, and the consequences will be deep.

.

Congratulations To Smithfield Foods!

by tristero

I missed this when it was announced in October, but Smithfield Foods won an environmental sustainability award.

Susan Forsell, Vice President Supply Chain, Quality Systems, McDonald’s USA said, “Smithfield Foods deserves to be recognized for their innovative approaches to protect the environment, to ensure the safety of their employees, the well-being of animals, the quality of products, and to promoting education in the communities they serve.”

That’s right: Smithfield won an environmental sustainability award from McDonald’s. What an honor! Of course, that must be a different Smithfield’s than this one:

In 1999,[then head of Smithfield Joseph] Luter bought a state-owned company called Animex, one of Poland’s biggest hog processors. Then he began doing business through a Polish subsidiary called Prima Farms, acquiring huge moribund Communist-era hog farms and converting them into concentrated feeding operations. Pork prices in Poland were low, so Smithfield’s sweeping expansion didn’t make strict economic sense, except that it had the virtue of pushing small hog farmers toward bankruptcy. By 2003, Animex was operating six subsidiary companies and seven processing plants, selling nine brands of meat and taking in $338 million annually.

The usual violations occurred. Near one of Smithfield’s largest plants, in Byszkowo, an enormous pool of frozen pig shit, pumped into a lagoon in winter, melted and ran into two nearby lakes. The lake water turned brown; residents in local villages got skin rashes and eye infections; the stench made it impossible to eat. A recent report to the Helsinki Commission found that Smithfield’s pollution throughout Poland was damaging the country’s ecosystems. Overapplication was endemic. Farmers without permits were piping liquid pig shit directly into watersheds that fed into the Baltic Sea.

Actually, it is the same Smithfield Foods that won the award. I guess in the past 10 years they’ve gone green. And if you believe that, there’s a hog farm down in Veracruz I’d like to sell you.

BTW, here’s a video interview with current CEO of Smithfield Foods, Larry Pope. In it, he claims that swine flu isn’t swine flu. Except he also agrees it is. It is simply impossible to parse most of what he’s saying: his sentences make sense, but they just don’t add up to a coherent meaning except for one thing: we’re working darn hard to make sure you won’t blame Smithfield. I, for one, believe him. They are indeed working darn hard to make sure you won’t blame them. (Note: to date, there is no conclusive evidence tying Smithfield hog farms to the outbreak, despite the fact that most of the earliest recent cases occurred about 12 miles away from a Smithfield subsidiary with truly disgusting conditions. )

Pope also claims, among other things that no employee or pig has gotten sick from swine flu, which, to be kind, is disingenuous. Let’s talk about the pigs first. The following statement appeared in a WHO FAQ about swine flu. It has since been removed, although a search of the sentence turns up references to it on their site as well as in this pdf:

The virus is spread among pigs by aerosols, direct and indirect contact, and asymptomatic carrier pigs.

In other words, the pigs don’t need to have swine flu symptoms to spread swine flu (again, it is important to stress that obviously pork products you buy in a store cannot spread swine flu ). [Update: Swine flu has recently been found in Canadian pigs.]

As for employees at the hog farms, they too needn’t be sick:

Although immunity to swine H1N1 viruses is low in the human population, a high proportion of persons occupationally exposed to pigs (such as pig farmers or pig veterinarians) have been shown in several studies to have antibody evidence of prior swine H1N1 flu infection.

Further swine flu news: The current virus appears to have first appeared in the US in 1998:

But let us be clear: the genetic sequences, which admirably are all being posted publicly, overwhelmingly confirm that the virus from Mexico is one of a type that has been circulating aggressively in North American pigs since 1998…

…based on the scientific details that have emerged in the past 24 hours from Andrew Rambaut’s lab at the University of Edinburgh, it is clearer than ever that there is a direct link from pigs to the human swine flu virus.

[Note: I haven’t read the material from Dr. Rambaut’s lab.]

Some folks think all the swine flu brouhaha is just so much…swill… because so far, except in Mexico, the swine flu has been mild. First, the swine flu has been spreading rapidly all over the world. Secondly, as many people point out, the first wave of infections in the Spanish influenza pandemic of 1918 was relatively mild. It was later waves of infection that were the most serious. Thirdly, there is no vaccine for this strain of swine flu.

Is all this reason to panic? Of course not. We’re not Republicans, for goodness sakes! But it is cause for serious concern [Update: the mortality rate has recently been estimated as being between 0.1 and 0.5%, about half the rate as the more standard flu. That doesn’t mean swine flu is “mild.” It simply underscores how dangerous all influenzas really are.]. And it is cause to investigate carefully and thoroughly how and where this virus originated and evolved.

Sunshine Patriots

by digby

The confederate rump screams:

Having picked fights with nearly every other GOP candidate for [Georgia] governor, John Oxendine has decided to poach on the territory of states’ rightist Ray McBerry.

Oxendine today endorsed not just the sentiments of Texas Gov. Rick “Secessionist” Perry, but a advocated a fundamental rollback of federal power.

Said Oxendine:

If governor, I would support legislation which puts Georgia on record as affirming our sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States and which would serve as notice and demand the federal government, as our agent, cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

Additionally, I would support legislation which states all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.

State sovereignty has previously been an issue copyrighted by McBerry, who ran against Gov. Sonny Perdue in 2006, drawing on the support of flaggers and other Confederate enthusiasts.

I haven’t heard this kind of talk since I was a kid. But everything old is new again. Get a load of Tom DeLay and Chris Matthews talking about Perry’s statement:

MATTHEWS: You can‘t secede from the union.

DELAY: We—Texas, as a republic, joined the union by treaty. There‘s a process in the treaty by which Texas could divide into five states. If we invoke that—and the last time it was voted on was 1985. If we invoke that, the United States Senate would kick us out and nullify the treaty because they‘re not going to allow 10 new Texas senators into the Senate. That‘s how you secede.

MATTHEWS: But you can‘t—can we straighten this out? Can Texas secede from the union?

DELAY: No, they can‘t secede.

MATTHEWS: Then why is he talking about it? Twice this week, he‘s talked about seceding from the union as a threat if he doesn‘t like the policies coming out of Washington. That‘s the kind of talk we heard in 1861.

DELAY: No, that‘s…

MATTHEWS: That‘s what killed 600,000 Americans. Why is he talking like this?

DELAY: Chris, Chris, we have a treaty, as I explained, and it would be the United States that would nullify that treaty because they would not allow 10 Texas senators. That‘s how it happened. And that‘s in the treaty.

MATTHEWS: So we would—so we would kick them out of the union?

That‘s nut talk.

DELAY: Yes.

MATTHEWS: That‘s nutty. Why are you talking like this, Tom? Mr. DeLay, you know this isn‘t a real conversation. This is not serious business.

DELAY: You‘re the one who brought it up.

MATTHEWS: Why are you—because the governor of your state is still talking about it. I‘m asking you, is he out to lunch here or what? What is it? What‘s going on?

DELAY: No. No. He‘s standing up for the sovereignty of the state of Texas. He‘s claiming—and they just passed a resolution in the state legislature invoking the 10 Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, claiming that the federal government has so overblown its power and so—grasped all kinds of—and now talking about grasping private enterprise and businesses and going up to anywhere from 50 percent to 60 percent tax rates on American citizens. And all the things that the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress is doing, he‘s standing up and saying, Enough is enough, and he‘s speaking for the people of Texas. We all feel that way.

(There’s more lunacy at the link. It’s a doozy.)

Can I just say what a bunch of whining little wimps these Republicans all are? They love to present themselves as stoic, manly warriors, loving heir country above all else, willing to lay down their lives for it.

Until something happens they don’t like and then they want to blow the thing up.

h/t to ed kilgore

Impressive

by tristero

It’s true: These days, “organic” hardly means what most of used to think it meant. And yes, “organic” doesn’t take into account, for example, the environmental impact of shipping produce a gazillion miles. And the class/cost issues: let’s not go there right now but let’s also not forget these are real issues and they are profoundly complex and troubling.

Still, the above chart, which is part of a fascinating graphic accompanying this article points to an amazingly rapid surge of interest among a large group of Americans in eating food grown quite differently than the stuff industrial agriculture provides. Good.

Now, if more of us continue to insist on eating what Michael Pollan calls “food” instead of “food-like substances,” and if more of us insist that that food be produced in a sensible fashion, you can bet your bippy there will be a backlash funded by the Smithfield Foods of this country And it will be cast as a culture war, between the” elite foodies” and real Americans – windsurfing versus red-blooded hunting redux. Remember the arugula wars? It’s gonna get nasty.

So let me be clear. I see absolutely no reason why the US government should be in the business of encouraging your children to eat in a way that drastically increases their chances of becoming diabetic and obese. But, via an entirely whack food policy that’s written in the best interests of big industrial food suppliers, that is exactly what is going on.

[Typos corrected after posting.]

Socialist Republican

by digby

Robert Gates said this to Fareed Zakaria today:

People must see government delivering services.

Shocking, I know.

Of course, he was talking about Afghanistan, but I can’t see any reason why that wouldn’t be true of any country, do you?

President Specter Fits Right In

by dday

Arlen Specter went on Meet The Press and defended his strong credentials as a Republican inside the Democratic Party.

Gregory: It was reported this week that when you met with the President, you said, “I will be a loyal Democrat; I support your agenda.” Let me test that on probably one of the most important areas of his agenda and that’s healthcare. Would you support healthcare reform that puts up a government-run public plan to compete with a private plan issued by a private insurance company.

Specter: No. And you misquote me, David. I did not say I would be a loyal Democrat. I did not say that. And last week, after I said I was changing parties, I voted against the budget because the budget has a way to pass healthcare with 51 votes,which undermines a basic Senate institution to require 60 votes to impose cloture on key issues.

Well, we certainly wouldn’t want a loyal Democrat. How putrid! Instead, Specter’s one of those vote-against-the-budget, vote-against-the-Democratic-health-care-plan Democrats. Just like his new BFF Ben Nelson.

Combine that with his appearance on Face The Nation, where he openly hoped that his defection to the Democratic Party would help the Republican Party.

SCHIEFFER: I was just talking to these health officials about this flu and how it — was there a danger it might mutate into something more dangerous. I want to ask you, do you feel that your switch to the Democratic Party, could that mutate into something even more dangerous for Republicans? Have you talked to anybody who has said to you, you know, I’m going to follow your example? Or is this just a one-time deal that pertains only to you?

SPECTER: Bob, it would be my hope that, as was reported in the New York Times last week, that this would be a wake-up call and the party would move for a broader big tent like we had under Reagan.

The party has changed so much since I was elected in 1980. And now, when I cast a vote with the Democrats on the stimulus package, that one vote created a precipitous drop so that I was looking at a situation where the prospects were very bleak to win a Republican primary, and I simply was not going to put my 29-year record before the Republican primary electorate.

But it would be my hope that we can maintain a strong two-party system and we’ll stop the business of what the Club for Growth has been doing to defeating moderates in the primary and then losing the general elections.

It’s a curious profile for a Democrat, running to ensure that Republican moderates get elected more easily.

Joe Sestak’s not giving up on primarying this guy. I hope he does. Maybe we can set up a special Lieberman Congress at a kiddie table somewhere so all these principled moderates can vote against each other’s priorities and pat each other on the back for it.

Devastatingby digbyApparently, the very special AIG executives needed to be reassured that the taxpayers weren’t going to deny them their well deserved bonuses. After all, they had suffered devastating losses in their personal wealth:

Even if the U.S. government were to entirely take over American International Group, company executives would still be able to collect bonuses at taxpayer expense, according to a letter from AIG CEO Ed Liddy to employees disclosed in the company’s recent SEC report. “As this special award is being made to a very select group of executives, I ask that you treat it as confidential,” wrote Liddy. The letter is dated less than a week after the government first bailed the company out. The letter assured the select group that “in the event the AIG entity that is your employer (the Company’) experiences a Change in Control (e.g., consummation of a merger, consolidation, statutory share exchange or similar form of corporate transaction involving the sale or other disposition of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets to an entity that is not an affiliate of the Company), AIG guarantees the payment of the 2008 Special Cash Retention award on the dates and under the conditions specified above.”[…]Some of those in line to get bonuses have family in the right places, according to the filing. The daughter of top executive Edmund Tse, Ada K.H. Tse, is president and CEO of AIG Global Investment Corp. (Asia) Ltd. In 2008, she pocketed $400,000 in “retention awards” and $250,000 in a year-end bonus. She will be “eligible to receive an additional amount that has not yet been approved. Ms. Tse also will be eligible for retention payments in 2009 in the amount of approximately $600,000,” reads the report. Daniel Neuger is the son of another top executive, Win Neuger, and serves as “managing director of AIG Global Investment Corp. and AIG Global Asset Management Holdings Corp.” He took in $75,000 in “retention awards” in 2008 and is on track for roughly $110,000 in 2009. Liddy promised there was more to come. “I fully recognize the devastating loss of personal wealth you’ve suffered, and pledge to you my personal commitment to provide an opportunity for substantial wealth creation through a combination of cash and equity awards in the coming months and years,” he wrote in the letter to employees outlining the bonus policy.

I think this pretty much sums up the problem. Corporate narcissists believe they should be rewarded even when the organization they run has not only failed but has nearly destroyed the entire global financial system. They are very, very special. Besides, they suffer a lot from the embarrassment at having been involved with such unpleasantness and that is punishment enough. It is for the lesser people to lose everything they have.
When Bush called his reign “The Ownership Society” I don’t think anyone understood exactly what he was saying. Now we do.

Update: Speaking of the crisis, is everyone aware of this? Atrios has mentioned it many times. Maybe I’m not reading the right magazines or blogs, but I never see anyoneelse talking about it. It seems to me that the weakened economy could be hit much harder by this second wave than the first one, especially since people are fully aware of the economic meltdown now. What’s up with this?