Iran: the nuclear option

Seymour Hersh reports that the Bush administration is making plans for a massive bombing campaign in Iran.

That in itself is not particularly surprising. Such contingency plans are standard fare in military circles, and as I've said before, a bombing campaign may well be necessary to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

And before getting too excited, we should note that all the sources are anonymous. Hersh is a solid investigative journalist, so he gets the benefit of the doubt from me. But don't jump on this as proven fact just yet.

That said, the report contains two remarkable and worrisome details:

There is a growing conviction among members of the United States military, and in the international community, that President Bush’s ultimate goal in the nuclear confrontation with Iran is regime change. Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged the reality of the Holocaust and said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official said. “That’s the name they’re using. They say, ‘Will Iran get a strategic weapon and threaten another world war?’ ”

Adolf Hitler? Even if Ahmadinejad had aspirations to be a new Hitler, he wields little actual power withint Iran -- and Iran is no Germany in terms of military strength. Bandying that term about so readily indicates a moralistic drive behind the planning, and calls up two bad associations I had hoped were dead and buried. It's very neocon language, and in the runup to the invasion of Iraq the administration repeatedly invoked Hitler in relation to Saddam Hussein. They can't seriously be contemplating the same thing with Iran.

And regime change through bombing? Has that ever worked? Apparently the administration thinks it will this time:

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”

Every conflict I can think of teaches the opposite lesson: that bombing rallies a population behind the government, however despised it may be otherwise. Iranians may dislike the mullahs, but they will dislike American bombs even more. It may be necessary to send in bombers to disrupt their nuclear capacity; but sending in bombers in hopes of toppling the mullahs is pure fantasy.

If this report is true, it means the same strain of naivety and wishful thinking that led to the botched Iraqi occupation is still in control of administration thinking -- which means besides being naive they're also incapable of learning from experience.

The second notable thing is that the administration is reportedly considering using tactical nuclear bunker busters to get at deeply buried facilities. On one level this is simply practical: If the facility is buried deeply enough, like the main Iranian centrifuge plant at Natanz, a nuke may be the only way to destroy it. But the political fallout from America using nuclear weapons again, as well as the irony of using nuclear weapons to keep Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, should give planners serious pause. But apparently it's not.

The attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he added, and some officers have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”

We should avoid nukes if at all possible. Maybe we can simply deny use of deeply buried facilities by destroying the entrances, ventilation shafts and the like. Maybe we can simply target and destroy any vehicles moving in and out of it, so that whatever is in the facility stays there. It may take more work, and be less certain of success. But that is probably preferable to the huge downsides of using nukes.

Here's what I worry about:

Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

That's what got us in trouble the first time. And it's impervious to reason.

A bombing campaign to eliminate Iran's nuclear capability is one thing, and something I will support once it's clear the diplomacy is going nowhere -- as I think it is. And if the preparations are part of a campaign to put pressure on Iran and show them that we're serious about using force if necessary, so much the better. Diplomacy based on the threat of force requires that the threat be credible.

But the principles underlying the reported planning go far beyond that -- and are a huge mistake.

nuclear, Bush, bombing, Iran, politics, midtopia

Hamas hints it might recognize Israel

Apparently the responsibility of having to govern -- and the prospect of bankruptcy -- is having an effect on Hamas.

A senior Hamas official said Friday the group is ready to accept a "two-state" solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the Hamas prime minister said he is unaware of plans by the Islamic militants to change their hard-line government platform.

The senior Hamas official said the two-state idea was to be raised by Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh in a meeting Friday with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, a moderate who advocates negotiations with
Israel.

The meeting was preceded by a series of contradictory statements from Hamas officials about whether a new government would recognize Israel in some fashion.

There's a lot of waffling there, so I'll believe it when I see it. But the fact that they're even willing to float the idea shows the pressure they're under. Not from the outside so much as internally: now that they're in charge, they have to act responsibly.

Apparently even Hamas can be tamed -- not by us, but by the Palestinian people.

Israel, Hamas, politics, midtopia

A threat to the fabric of freedom

The Bush administration continues to play by its own set of rules, to the detriment of truth and liberty.

First we have the big news of the day, that Bush himself authorized Lewis Libby to discuss classified information with reporters.

As the Washington Post notes, this is legal by definition -- the President, after all, has the ultimate authority to declassify information -- but was "highly unusual and amounted to using sensitive intelligence data for political gain."

This doesn't directly implicate Bush in the Plame case; he authorized discussion of a National Intelligence Estimate, not Plame's identity. But it does expose Bush's hypocrisy, since he complained about leaks of classified information while leaking such information himself. So his real position is that he should be the only one allowed to leak information. This is legally correct, but ethically it stinks.

But almost lost in the hubbub over the leak revelation is this little gem from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:

Gonzales left open the possibility yesterday that President Bush could order warrantless wiretaps on telephone calls occurring solely within the United States -- a move that would dramatically expand the reach of a controversial National Security Agency surveillance program.

In response to a question from Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) during an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, Gonzales suggested that the administration could decide it was legal to listen in on a domestic call without supervision if it were related to al-Qaeda.

"I'm not going to rule it out," Gonzales said.

Translation: there is no legal line that the administration will not cross on its own authority. Warrants? We don't need no stinkin' warrants. FISA? Nothing but a toothless scrap of paper.

Whatever you think of the administration, giving one branch of government the right to decide for itself whether its actions are legal is a really, really, really bad idea. The whole reason warrants exist is to protect citizens from the government. What Gonzales has just suggested is that such protection doesn't exist if the executive branch, on its own sole authority, decides it wants to eavesdrop on you.

I have no objection to wiretapping suspected terrorists; I want them caught and foiled just like everybody else. Just get a warrant first. If the evidence of terrorism involvement isn't strong enough to survive scrutiny by a court as compliant as FISA, then the wiretap is probably unjustified.

You know, Democrats may be a threat to my wallet (though given the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush administration, I don't know how anyone can make that case anymore). But they don't scare me. Republicans under Bush, on the other hand, are a threat to the fundamental fabric of freedom. Warrantless wiretaps. Pre-emptive war based on the thinnest of reasoning, followed by stunning incompetence in the occupation and here at home. Massive deficits. Politicizing science. Corruption. Shifting the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class. Unfunded mandates for the states. Band-aid solutions for big problems like health care. Ignoring AMT. The list goes on and on and on. Their carelessness and hubris is not just incredible; it's actively harmful.

Find a set of principles, Mr. President. Respect the law, Mr. President. Do your job, Mr. President.

And Congress, you do yours. Stand up for the country and actually serve as a check on the executive branch, rather than playing the patsy or accomplice.

You won't see me rant very often. But stuff like this makes my blood boil.

warrant, wiretaps, eavesdropping, Gonzales, Libby, leak, Bush, politics, midtopia

Bob Woodruff goes home

Bob Woodruff, the ABC anchorman seriously injured in a roadside bomb blast in Iraq, appears to be well on the way to recovery. He sent a note to his ABC colleagues thanking them for all the support they've shown.

I am moving on to outpatient treatment and I can’t tell you what a blessing it is. Though I know there is still a long road ahead, it’s nice to be feeling more like myself again – laughing with family, reading bedtime stories and reminding my kids to do their homework.

The photo of Woodruff was taken today, and he looks very well.

His cameraman, Doug Vogt, was released from the hospital in February.

Woodruff, midtopia

Low class on both sides of the aisle

First you have Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney claiming racial bias when she's stopped by a Capitol police officer -- whom she subsequently hit -- and apologizing only when the case is referred for possible criminal prosecution.

Then you have DeLay supporters shouting down Nick Lampson, the Democratic candidate for his seat.

Were these people raised by wolves?

Update: Let's add Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., to the list. He decided to make a political issue out of where his opponent is having his daughter's cancer treated.

Weldon, DeLay, Lampson, McKinney, politics, midtopia

Islam's Reformation

I recently had an e-mail exchange with a reader who said that the problem facing the world today is Islam. Not radical Islam, not Islamic terrorists, but Islam itself.

He pointed out, correctly, that much of the violent behavior is justified by either the Koran or the Hadiths (collections of sayings and deeds attributed to Muhammad). His main thesis was that Islam is not a peaceful religion, it is a violent one, and thus cannot be accomodated; it must be opposed.

Even if you believe this, there are lots of reasons not to act on that belief -- not making instant enemies of the world's 1 billion Muslims, for example. I know moderate Muslims, so they do exist. Even "battle of civilizations" proponents should want such Muslims on their side, simply because it makes the battle more winnable.

But that's not the point of this article. What I'm reaching for here is historical context. I do not pretend to be a religious scholar, but this is what I see unfolding in Islam today.

Most major religions are born out of conflict and tribulation. Judaism arose from the beliefs of the wandering tribes of Israel; Christianity arose from the torture-death of a Jewish heretic and rabblerouser; Islam arose among the warring nomadic tribes of the Middle East. The notable exception to that rule is Buddhism -- which is also, not coincidentally, the most peaceful of the major religions.

Thus Jewish scripture is full of stories of conquering land, slaughtering enemies, condoning polygamy and slavery, and horrific punishments for violation of minor religious laws. Christianity, being an offshoot of Judaism, adopted those same stories, renaming them the Old Testament. And despite the New Testament being a modification or even wholesale replacement for the Old, the Old Testament is still cited on such matters as homosexuality and adultery, as well as when invoking the awesome power of God and the penalties for defying him.

Islam, too, contains a contradictory mix of violence and peacemaking, a product of the tribal culture it sprang from, as well as the practical realities that Muhammad straddled the secular/sectarian line. He founded a major religion, but he was also heavily involved in efforts to unite the tribes and turn their violent energies outward, into a conquering force that swept the region. It's no coincidence that the Koran is more forgiving and peaceful than the Hadiths. The task is trying to separate the words of Muhammad the prophet from the words of Muhammad the general and tribal nationalist.

Admittedly, it's more complicated than that. The Koran and the Hadiths are somewhat similar to the Jewish Torah and Talmud. One is the core religious text; the other is a collection of explanations and traditions. But in the case of the Hadith, the authenticity of many sayings is suspect, and as a result there are many different Hadiths. Reconciling them will be a major challenge. But the main point is that the Hadiths are less authoritative than the Koran.

From those usually violent beginnings, most religions seem to undergo a predictable growth arc -- from persecuted sect to evangelical expansion to established religion that persecutes its own sects in turn. At some point there is a schism among believers, which is either settled -- violently, for the most part -- or results in a split, such as the Protestant/Catholic split in Christianity or the Sunni/Shiite split in Islam.

Eventually a religion has to reconcile its violent, expansionistic origins with the reality of being part of the establishment. And that means repudiating the more extreme aspects of their origins. Hence no mainstream Christian denomination follows Jewish dietary law, even though Jesus was a devout Jew. No Jew or Christian thinks slavery is divinely approved, even though the Old Testament had no problem with it. Most of Leviticus has been discarded wholesale.

In addition, most religions discover that religion and secular power don't mix well, nor does intolerance and enforced orthodoxy. So over time most religions get out of the governing business, and allow all believers to follow their conscience. Christianity managed that trick just a couple of centuries ago -- and still hasn't shaken the impulse entirely.

Such growth didn't happen easily, and it didn't happen overnight. It takes a long time for a religion to mature. It's no coincidence that the oldest major Western religion, Judaism, is also the least evangelical and most tolerant; Jews resolved their major schism thousands of years ago. Christianity is younger, and resolved its contradictions just a few hundred years ago, although the effects linger in certain quarters.

Islam is the youngest of the three. I submit that what we are seeing today is Islam passing through the same painful adolescence that both Judaism and Christianity endured centuries ago.

Let's look at the timeline. Christianity was born in the 1st Century. The Reformation came 1,500 years later, and took a century of warfare to resolve -- and was preceded by centuries of religious warfare, such as the Crusades.

Islam was founded in the 7th Century. And now, 1,500 years later, it is at the same stage of development as Christianity was 600 years ago.

The parallels are striking. The 1400's began with the Spanish Inquisition, which eventually led to the expulsion of Jews and Muslims from Spain. Elsewhere there was a brisk business in burning heretics at the stake, notably John Huss and Jerome of Prague, burned for spreading the writings of John Wycliffe.

This led to the rise of the Hussites, which in turn prompted the first interChristian Crusade, a 13-year war between the church and the Hussites that the Hussites won.

All this bloodshed merely laid the foundation for the Reformation, which would convulse the entire 16th Century in violence and horror. And religious wars also marked the 17th Century, notably the Thirty Years' War that began in 1618.

But Christianity emerged from all that a more mature religion. Split, of course, between Catholics and Protestants, but with armed force no longer a desirable option for enforcing orthodoxy. Two centuries of war had, quite simply, worn everybody out. They were ready to embrace tolerance if that was the price of peace.

And so it is, I believe, with Islam. We are unfortunate enough to be alive during Islam's bloody transition from its medieval origins to modernity. The good news is that eventually moderate theology should win the day: the more violent parts of the Koran will be devalued, and any conflict between the Koran and the Hadith will be resolved in favor of the Koran, since the Koran is God's word and the Hadith is not.

The bad news is that it could take 100 years or more, and the fallout and human cost could be very, very high.

There is reason for optimism. The world is not as backward a place as it was in the 15th Century. The West has learned the lessons of religious violence, and can serve as an example and guide for resolving Islam's internal conflicts. So while the Islamic Reformation is and will be violent, it can be expected to take less time than the Christian Reformation did.

Our job, therefore, is to encourage and support the moderate reformers while opposing and undermining the medievalists. It will take patience, money, intellectual firepower and an acknowledgement that it will proceed in fits and starts. But the entire world will benefit from Islam shedding its medieval past. If ever there was a project well worth undertaking, this is it.


terrorism, history, Reformation, religion, Christianity, Islam, politics, midtopia

Creative professions oppose gay-marriage ban

The Twin Cities is one of the few nationally recognized centers of the ad industry outside of New York and Los Angeles. Twin Cities ad offices have billings of about $2 billion a year, and provide thousands of well-paying jobs.

That's why we should care about the letter that 50 local ad agencies sent to Gov. Pawlenty.

The letter says that such a constitutional amendment could undermine a creative business climate, stifle recruitment and send the wrong message to potential clients.

The agencies are self-interested to a degree, since many creative fields such as advertising have a higher-than-average percentage of gay employees. But when that industry is a major part of the state economy, we all have an interest in it.

There's research that shows a correlation between a region's gay population and its cultural and economic vibrancy. One can debate the causality -- do concentrations of gays create such vibrancy, or does the vibrancy create an environment that is attractive to gays? -- but the correlation is clear.

A gay marriage ban is not only unjust; it would be economically damaging to the state, chasing away the sort of high-paying jobs that we should be trying to attract.

creative class, gay marriage, politics, midtopia

Split brain

How do you know if you're a moderate? When stuff like this happens:

Right now the site is getting a stream of (presumably) conservative/Republican readers, thanks to a link from Hugh Hewitt to the post on health insurance and Mitt Romney.

At the same time, another stream of visitors is coming in from the Daou Report, to read why we have no reason to trust the GOP on ethics or budgetary matters.

It's good to be in the middle.

politics, midtopia

Democracy advances in the Mideast

Kuwaiti women went to the polls for the first time on Wednesday, in a by-election viewed as a test case for the full parliamentary elections in 2007.

The election also featured another first: female candidates.

The May 2005 decision [to let women vote] sparked widespread debate about women's roles in politics, with some conservative Islamist members of Parliament arguing that women should not be allowed in Parliament without wearing the Islamic hijab, or head covering.

The landmark political participation of women in Kuwait's election Tuesday is part of a regional trend in the Arab Gulf states, where women are growing more publicly vocal about political matters.

Qatar recently announced that it would hold first ever parliamentary elections in 2007, in which women will be allowed to vote. These modest political gains mark a dramatic shift for a region where many women still cannot even leave their homes, take a job, or go to school without the permission of their father or husband.

These are baby steps, to be sure. Both Kuwait and Qatar are still ruled by unelected emirs, and there are still plenty of obstacles to overcome:

32-year-old chemical engineer Jenan Al-Bousheri has taken a modest approach to her campaign, refusing to visit the all-male diwaniyas, or gathering places. Another female politician, Ayesha Al-Reshaid, who already announced plans to run for parliament in 2007 and has visited male diwaniyas, recently received a death threat warning her to stop campaigning.

Ms. Bousheri, who wears the Islamic hijab and has worked for the municipality for 10 years, says she doesn't feel threatened but instead is simply being respectful of the country's conservative nature. In addition to not visiting the diwaniyas, she refused to include her photo on campaign billboards, which could be considered indecent.

Still, this demonstrates two important things: that there is such a thing as "moderate" Islam and relatively moderate Arab states, and that gradual change is possible. Both Kuwait and Qatar would likely have taken these steps without our invading Iraq; and by doing it on their own they become true examples of freedom flowering in the Middle East.

Our job now is to support these countries -- using aid and trade agreements to demonstrate the tangible benefits of moving toward democracy and tolerance -- while gently pressing them to adopt true democracy and hold elections for top leadership posts. That approach has risks: the current Western-friendly emirs could be replaced by more hostile radical Islamists, as happened in Palestine. But the Gulf emirates are not Palestine, and if we cannot persuade them to move forward instead of backward, we have lost the war of ideas.

At any rate, the only principled approach is to try. Decades of blindly supporting "our" dictators is one of the things that helped create the current mess in the Mideast. At least this way, if the Mideast descends into a new Dark Ages the blood isn't on our hands.

Update: A male candidate won the election. But one of the two female candidates, Jinan Boushahri, came in second. A distant second, to be sure -- 1,807 votes to the winner's 5,436 -- but she beat out three male candidates.

suffrage, women, elections, Kuwait, politics, midtopia

Massachusetts tries health insurance for everyone

The Massachusetts legislature has passed a bill requiring everyone in the state to buy health insurance, much the way car insurance works in most places.

Under the bill, the state would offer subsidies to private insurers to cover more low-income families. Companies with more than 10 workers that don't offer health insurance to their workers would pay $295 to the state for each worker, money that will be used to subsidize the health insurance of others.

Something to watch; it's one of several models of universal health care being bandied about. This is one of the most market-oriented ones. And being pushed by Mitt Romney, a Republican governor in a blue state. If it works, it could find national support -- and could fuel Romney's presidential aspirations.

For a more comprehensive take on health care, here's what I wrote a few weeks ago.

Romney, health insurance, health care, Massachusetts, politics, midtopia

Never mind

The GOP is vowing to tackle ethics reform, among other things.

''We will take steps necessary to plug those areas where problems have erupted," said Boehner, an Ohio Republican, adding that ethics reform will be merely the first of many initiatives this spring, including a new fiscally responsible budget plan.

Translation: "We were sleazy, but we'll be good now, at least in the areas where we've been caught." Also, note the tacit admission that up until now their budget plans have not been fiscally responsible.

Why should we suddenly trust them now?

corruption, DeLay, politics, midtopia

Senate kills gay marriage bill

As expected, the DFL-controlled Senate killed the proposed gay marriage amendment in committee, on a 5-4 party-line vote.

There was only one interesting twist:

Senators altered the proposed amendment so that it wouldn't have asked voters to strictly ban the legal recognition of same-sex relationships. Instead, it would have prohibited judges from defining marriage in Minnesota, reserving that right for state legislators.

Though one Democrat supported that alteration, all five then proceeded to kill the amendment anyway.

That would almost have made the subsequent campaign interesting.

The DFL did the right thing, but of course they were self-interested as well. Without the amendment on the ballot, social conservatives have less reason to turn out on election day. And that's really what this whole thing was about: Republicans trying to use a wedge issue to get their supporters to the polls, and Democrats trying to foil them.

It cannot be said too often: whatever you think about gay marriage, this amendment is premature. Marriage, for better or worse, is still restricted to men and women in Minnesota. If and when that status is threatened, then we can talk about mucking with the state constitution. Until then, this is just noise, smoke and political grandstanding.

Sen. Michelle Bachmann, the amendment's main backer, has become a single-issue legislator. For that reason alone she should be sent packing in November.

As a side note, Bachmann's openly gay stepsister showed up at the hearing with her partner to "show that the issue affects all Minnesota families." That puts Bachmann in an elite group: antigay activists or politicians with gay relatives. The group includes Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, whose son Jamiel is gay. And Alan Keyes, whose daughter, Maya, is gay.

As Dick Cheney (whose daughter, Mary, is gay) demonstrates, having a gay relative usually makes you more sympathetic to their situation. With the exception of folks like Bachmann, it will get harder and harder to find support for antigay policies as more and more people realize that people they know and care about are gay. When someone makes Dick Cheney look sensitive by comparison, you know they have a compassion deficit.

Minnesota, Bachmann, gay marriage, politics, midtopia

Rating Jim Ramstad

I got a newsletter from my Congressman, Jim Ramstad, the other day. He has a reputation as a moderate Republican, no big suprise since he represents a suburban Minnesota district. But is it deserved?

In the newsletter he highlights his stance on various issues, carefully tailored to appeal to his constituents.

TERRORISM AND SECURITY
Expedite the training of Iraqi troops so we can bring our troops home. Supported Patriot Act extension. Supported border security legislation. The first is the only logical course. The second I have more disagreements with, largely in the area of civil liberty protections. The last is simply a mess that I haven't made a decision on yet.

JOBS AND TAX RELIEF
Brags a lot about tax cuts, but curiously mentions nothing about the deficit....

HEALTH CARE AND MEDICARE
Supports altering the Medicare drug program to allow importation of drugs and price negotiations with drug companies. Wants to expand health savings accounts and enact medical liability reform. Amen to the first; the second is fine but doesn't come anywhere close to being a solution for rising medical costs; the third is code for capping damages in lawsuits, which is simply a grudge against trial lawyers, who overwhelmingly support Democrats. For a variety of reasons, an arbitrary cap is a terrible idea.

EDUCATION
Supports requiring full federal funding for federal education mandates. Amen.

ETHICS
Says all the right things, but really vague on the specifics. This is an issue where talk is far, far cheaper than action.

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
Voted for the energy bill and against ANWR drilling. In Minnesota, supporting ANWR is political suicide. The energy bill wasn't any great shakes. The House version provided *no* incentives for alternative forms of electricity production while providing more than $6 billion for oil and gas incentives and research.

TRANSPORTATION
Supports the Northstar Corridor commuter train project and the Hiawatha light-rail line, both important steps toward a serious mass-transit system.

PROPERTY RIGHTS
Supports legislation limiting the power of eminent domain. Generally a good idea as long as it isn't carried to an extreme.

Reading that list, I became curious about what he wasn't telling us about. So I looked him up on Thomas. Here's what I found.

Ramstad has sponsored 22 bills this session. Among them:

Supporting a free-trade pact with Taiwan;
A private bill to keep a Greek national, Konstantinos Ritos, from being deported;
A whole bunch of tax code and export law changes that appear designed to benefit state businesses;
Various crime-related bills;
Various bills extending health services for retirees.

Not a particularly distinguished list, but nothing really objectionable, either.

Okay, fine. So how did he vote? Let's turn to the scorecards.

ACLU: 9 percent
Public Citizen: 40 percent
League of Conservation Voters: 61 percent
Club for Growth: 50 percent, more or less

A whole slew of others are available at Project Vote Smart.

The summation: Ramstad is a right-leaning moderate, although he swims against the tide in some ways, such as his strong scores on environmental issues and poor scores from the NRA and other gun groups. Naturally I disagree with him on some specific issues, but overall he's the kind of politician I can support -- a moderate who doesn't toe his party line all the time. His legislative accomplishments are a bit lightweight for someone who has been in Congress for 16 years, but I'd rather have a less-active moderate than an overactive partisan.

scorecard, Ramstad, politics, midtopia

Gasohol vs. gasoline

Here in Minnesota, all gasoline is required to contain ethanol. If you're like me, you've probably wondered just what we accomplish by doing so. Is the total energy cost of ethanol lower than gasoline? What about greenhouse gasses?

Which is why I was glad to see a very straightforward commentary by biology professor Peter Wyckoff in Monday's Star Tribune.

The main point of the article is Wyckoff advocating that we start using switchgrass as a source of ethanol instead of corn. But for me the most interesting facts were these:

Weighing all the factors -- the fossil fuel needed to grow and ferment corn vs. the cost of drilling oil, the lower energy content of ethanol vs. gasoline (and the resulting lower mileage) -- ethanol helps, but not a whole lot. Gasoline containing 20 percent ethanol will cut a vehicle's total greenhouse emissions by about 2 percent.

That may not be much, but it's something. Unless ethanol costs significantly more -- and Wyckoff doesn't get into that -- increased ethanol use is worth pursuing.

But it does suggest that the strongest argument for ethanol is energy independence, not global warming. The more ethanol we use the less oil we need, which is an absolute good in my book. Because what we pay at the pump for a gallon of gasoline doesn't reflect the political, military and moral cost of that gallon. The sooner we can stop subsidizing repressively medieval regimes, the better.

E-20, greenhouse, oil, Wyckoff, ethanol, politics, midtopia

Tom DeLay to quit Congress

Yow. DeLay has abandoned plans to seek re-election and will resign his seat by mid-June, setting the stage for a special election to fill the vacancy.

I think that means two elections in very short order, since a special election usually just fills out the remainder of a Congressman's term. I guess the hope is a Republican will win and have the advantage of incumbency come November. With two elections in six months, it also might be a way to leverage DeLay's money advantage.

Why did he drop out? He cites declining poll numbers, but this is the sort of thing that will fuel all sorts of speculation. Maybe DA Ronnie Earle actually has something on him after all, instead of simply harassing him with a politically motivated indictment as many DeLay supporters have claimed. Maybe the two aides who have pleaded guilty to corruption have agreed to testify about his involvement. Maybe the Republican leadership felt his trial was turning into a spectacle that was damaging the party.

Whatever happens, good riddance. DeLay was pure hardball sleaze from the get-go; if he didn't actually cross the ethical line with his funding and lobbying tactics, he sidled right up to it repeatedly. He was one of the people poisoning Congress with unbridled partisanship.

May I dare hope that moderates will step up to fill the leadership vacuum being created by the current GOP troubles?

Texas, Congress, DeLay, politics, midtopia

Lucky 17

This isn't the way these things usually turn out:

A huge military cargo plane crashed shortly after takeoff at Dover Air Force Base on Monday, breaking apart in a belly flop that drenched some of the 17 people aboard with fuel but caused no fire or life-threatening injuries. ...

Military officials said the C-5 Galaxy, the military's largest plane at more than six stories high and 247 feet long, developed problems soon after taking off for Spain about 6:30 a.m.

It crashed just short of the runway while attempting to return to the base and broke in two behind the cockpit. The tail assembly landed several hundred yards away, and an engine was thrown forward by the impact.

Next time I'm buying Lotto tickets, I want one of those 17 to pick the numbers.

midtopia

Zarqawi demoted

Over on Al-Jazeera, an al-Qaeda representative claims that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been stripped of his position as political head of the Iraqi resistance following "mistakes", retaining only a military role.

Azzam said he regularly receives "credible information on the resistance in Iraq. He said al-Zarqawi had "made many political mistakes", including "the creation of an independent organisation, al-Qaeda in Iraq".

"Zarqawi also took the liberty of speaking in the name of the Iraqi people and resistance, a role which belongs only to the Iraqis," Azzam said.

As a result "the resistance command inside and outside Iraq, including imams, criticised him and after long discussions demanded that he be confined to military action".

Not quite the same thing as repudiating his tactics, such as attacks on civilians. And the claim is totally unconfirmed, so take it with a grain of salt. But it squares with reports of friction between Zarqawi's group and Iraqi insurgents. The good news is that the friction appears to be moderating Zarqawi's tactics; the bad news is that he and the Iraqis are still working together.

Zarqawi, terrorism, Iraq, politics, midtopia

Scalia photographer barred from working for Archdiocese

The photographer who took the picture of Antonin Scalia flipping off reporters has been blacklisted by the Boston Archdiocese.

Scalia had asked the freelance photographer, Peter Smith, not to publish the photo. Instead, he gave it to the Boston Herald, which put it on its front page on Thursday.

Smith, 51, had freelanced for diocese's The Pilot newspaper for a decade, but he said yesterday, “I did the right thing. I did the ethical thing,” according to the Herald. Smith is also an assistant photojournalism professor at Boston University.

I didn't care about Scalia's Sicilian gesture, which is why I didn't write about it. But this is just silly. The Archdiocese has an absolute right to determine who it will buy pictures from, and cutting ties to a freelancer doesn't have the same legal and ethical baggage as firing an employee. But this is petty with a capital P.

Will it have a chilling effect on future coverage of Scalia? I doubt it, especially with the Herald as a willing alternative market for such images. But overall it doesn't help if reporters and photographers have to worry about jeopardizing existing contracts in order to write about or photograph powerful people. Freelancers should be judged on the quality and reliability of their work for the diocese, not the content of unrelated work.

Boston, Peter Smith, Scalia, politics, midtopia

SCOTUS rejects Padilla appeal

The Supreme Court rejected an appeal by "enemy combatant" Jose Padilla, who has been trying to challenge being jailed without charge for three years.

So on the surface, the Bush administration's legal strategy -- charge Padilla with crimes *other* than the ones they used to justify his detention, in order to avoid Supreme Court review -- has worked.

But the details provide reason for hope -- and illustrate why the government was so eager to keep the case away from the Supreme Court.

Three justices said the court should have agreed to take up the case anyway: Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

And three other court members, including Chief Justice John Roberts, said that they would be watching to ensure Padilla receives the protections "guaranteed to all federal criminal defendants."

The other two justices were Kennedy and Stevens. That pretty much serves notice that the government would have had tough sailing in defending its practices before the Court.

It also demonstrates that the Court now has a three-justice conservative bloc whose votes are dogmatically predictable: Scalia, Thomas and now Alito.

enemy combatant, terrorism, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, Padilla, politics, midtopia

Kersten on campus

I was going to write about today's Kersten column, but Great Plains View beat me to it.

The main point: I agree with Kersten. But so what?

protest, Macalester, Coke, Kersten, politics, midtopia