Month: April 2014

I’m opposed to the death penalty, but not because I think that no one deserves to die for their crimes. The two men who were on Death Row and set to be executed in Oklahoma last night both deserved to die for their crimes. One raped and killed an 11 month old baby. The other executed a girl who had just graduated from high school after carrying out a home invasion, carjacking her car, and kidnapping her. There’s no one disputing their guilt.

But there are at least three problems. The first is that innocent people do occasionally get convicted of capital crimes. Once you kill someone, you can’t unkill them if it turns out you convicted the wrong person. The second is that there is a lot of wisdom in our religious traditions that counsel that we shouldn’t judge lest we be judged, and that we should forgive those who trespass against us, so that we might be forgiven for our own trespasses. The third is what everyone is talking about today, which is that it’s hard to kill people in a humane way that doesn’t entail constitutionally-banned cruel and unusual punishment.

Personally, I don’t know why they can’t just give people a lethal injection of morphine. First, anesthetize people like you would for a major surgery, and then jack them up with enough opioids that they stop breathing. They’d never feel a thing and they certainly wouldn’t feel any pain. Why all these exotic cocktails of medicines? I’m sure there’s a reason, but I’m also sure my solution would work and wouldn’t be particularly traumatizing for anyone if it didn’t.

But, rather than getting more efficient at killing people, maybe we should work more on understanding that we’re better off getting rid of the death penalty since it’s never going to be error-free. Letting some people live despite the fact that they deserve to die isn’t going to hurt us. Not really. Not like it hurts when we kill the wrong person. Not like it hurts when the cocktail of drugs produces a cruel and unusual death.

.
Kerry should experience a warm bath here as I have referred to the right-wing Atlantic Council and its harsh statements of containment for Putin’s Russia in a New Cold War. The US wants to reduce its military presence in Europe and has set policy for NATO members to increase investments in its military: Navy, Air Force and Army. The Ukraine is an ideal nation to illustrate the “Imperial Danger” of the Russian Bear. A dangerous path to create division between new and old Europe, when did we take this path before? Rumsfeld in the lead-up to the Iraq War …

Secretary Kerry at the Atlantic Council’s “Toward a Europe Whole and Free” Conference

Thank you all for the privilege of sharing some thoughts with you at this both timely and very, very important gathering. It’s my privilege to be able to be here, and I’m particularly happy to be here with so many of my colleagues, both our foreign ministers and defense ministers who are here. We had a chance to chat briefly out there. We have been meeting regularly along the trail, and I have come to admire and respect each of them for the clarity of their vision and for the way in which they have been really prescient on many of these issues.

I love the new digs and thank all those who are responsible for that. And also, Fred, thanks so much for your leadership and for the tremendous work that is being done at the Atlantic Council lately, the success of this particular conference but also the work, the groundwork you’ve been laying, and the focus that you have had on the criticality of the NATO relationship, the European relationship, which, as we know, thinking back to comments of the near past about Old Europe and New Europe and other times things that have been floating out there over these last years, this discussion is even more timely and relevant.

 « click for more info on New Atlanticists
John Kerry delivered the confrontational call in a speech to the
Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, DC.(AFP/Mandel Ngan)

This year marks a number of different milestones that are really worth remembering, obviously beginning with the fact that it is 65 years since Secretary of State Dean Acheson and his European counterparts came together to sign the North Atlantic Treaty. And it’s been 25 years, amazingly, since the fall of the Berlin Wall. And that wall, as we all know too well, symbolically and literally divided East and West and Europe.

It’s been 15 years, and 10 years, and 5 years since then that NATO has welcomed new partners into the post-Cold War era. And as we have expanded as an organization, as NATO has expanded as an organization, I think it’s safe to say we have also expanded democracy, prosperity, and stability in Europe, and we have opened new opportunities in order to be able to advance security even further, and we have spurred economic growth around the globe.

VIDEO: Secretary Kerry Delivers Remarks at a Atlantic Council Conference

○ Former US Ambassador at NATO, Ivo Daalder, at Atlantic Council
○ Trans-Atlantic global leadership at stake in Ukraine – Kerry
○ The Guardian: John Kerry rips into ‘Putin’s Russia’ over Ukraine crisis

Old Europe and Disillusionment of America

Continued below the fold …

End of an affair?

(The Economist) Sept. 10, 2009 – After two decades of sometimes fervent Atlanticism in the ex-communist world, disillusionment (some would call it realism) is growing. At its height the bond between eastern Europe and America was based, like the best marriages, on a mixture of emotion and mutual support. The romance dates from the cold war: when western Europe was sometimes squishy in dealing with the Soviet empire, America was robust. When the Iron Curtain fell, ex-dissidents and retired cold warriors found they had plenty in common. America pushed for the expansion of NATO, guaranteeing the east Europeans’ security. In return, ex-communist countries loyally supported America, particularly in providing troops for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 « click for info Germany’s Angela Merkel
Illustration by Peter Schrank

That relationship is now looking more wobbly. A new poll (see chart) by the German Marshall Fund, a think-tank, shows that western Europe is now much more pro-American and pro-NATO than the ex-communist east. Until last year, the eastern countries swallowed their misgivings about George Bush, while the west of the continent writhed in distaste at what many saw as his administration’s incompetence and heavy-handedness.

The ascent of Barack Obama has boosted America’s image in most countries, but only modestly in places like Poland and Romania. Among policymakers in the east, the dismay is tangible. In July, 22 senior figures from the region, including Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, wrote a public letter bemoaning the decline in transatlantic ties.

One reason is that the Obama administration is rethinking a planned missile-defence system, which would have placed ten interceptor rockets in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic, in order to guard against Iranian missile attacks on America and much of Europe. That infuriated Russia, which saw the bases as a blatant push into its front yard. Changing the scheme–probably using seaborne interceptors–risks looking like a climb-down to suit Russian interests.

Poland is also worried that a promised battery of Patriot air-defence missiles, originally to protect the interceptors, may now be only a temporary loan of dummy rockets for training purposes–“just a sales exercise”, says an official in Warsaw, crossly. America says it never intended to station real rockets there permanently.

The administration also botched its participation in Poland’s 70th anniversary commemoration of the start of the second world war on September 1st. Other countries, including Russia and Germany, sent top people. America, initially, offered only a retired Clinton-era official. William Perry, who was a notable sceptic about NATO expansion. After squawks of dismay, Jim Jones, the national security adviser, went too. But Poles sensed a snub.

 

My recent diary – Anglo-American Relationship, Atlanticists and Israel.

Why in the hell is Jonathan Karl still talking about goddamned Benghazi? That’s worse than if Dan Rather was still talking about the Alabama Air National Guard. Doesn’t Karl know that he has lost all credibility as a reporter on this issue? And he’s dry-humping this carcass of on issue for the benefit of a party that doesn’t even believe in anything the State Department does, including basic diplomacy. They’ve never cared about attacks on our diplomatic facilities. Let’s see, how many of those attacks occurred during the Bush administration?

22 January 2002, Calcutta, India- Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami gunmen attack Consulate
14 June 2002, Karachi, Pakistan- al-Qaeda truck bomb detonates outside Consulate
12 October 2002, Denpasar, Indonesia- Consular Office bombed by Jemaah Islamiyah as part of the Bali bombings
28 February 2003, Karachi, Pakistan- Unknown gunmen attack Consulate
30 June 2004, Tashkent, Uzbekistan- Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan suicide bomber attacks Embassy
6 December 2004, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia- al-Qaeda gunmen raid diplomatic compound
2 March 2006, Karachi, Pakistan- Car bomb explodes outside Consulate
12 September 2006, Damascus, Syria- Gunmen raid US Embassy
12 January 2007, Athens, Greece- RPG Fired at Embassy by Revolutionary Struggle
18 March 2008, Sana’a, Yemen- Mortar attack against US Embassy
9 July 2008, Istanbul, Turkey- Armed attack against Consulate
17 September 2008, Sana’a, Yemen-Two car bombs outside US embassy in Yemeni capital

About 60 people died in those Bush era attacks on our embassies, consulates, and compounds. You never heard the Democrats trying to make political hay about it. And that’s ironic here because the charge is that the administration lied about what happened to cover their asses. So, they’re accused of being political by people who won’t shut the fuck up about a topic they don’t even care about.

The people who deserve answers on Benghazi are the people who actually work at the State Department. And you don’t hear them asking for more information.

This is some biblical-ass rain.

Under normal circumstances, when people talk about amending the Constitution, I just roll my eyes. But, this is different:

Today, Senator Chuck Schumer announced that the Senate will vote this year on a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court rulings in Citizens United and McCutcheon v. F.E.C.. The idea would be to give back states and the federal government the power to regulate campaign contributions that was taken away by those rulings.

Yes, I know that it won’t go anywhere anytime soon. But you have to start somewhere. And making the bastards vote for plutocracy in the most explicit way possible is a smart thing to do. The movement to pass this amendment, should one arise, would attract people for all sides of the political spectrum. After all, we have 99% of the population to choose from.

I’m a little surprised that Rep. Bennie Thompson decided to let loose on a radio program last weekend. I think he actually went too far in his statements, especially in his assessment of the Republican leadership’s motivation for opposing everything the president wants to do. I think he’s forgetting just how disrespectfully Bill Clinton was treated, including by Republican committee chairmen and the leadership of the House. Rep. Thompson, who is himself a former chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has never struck me as a bomb thrower, so I am assuming he is very frustrated with how things stand in Congress.

A Mississippi Democratic Congressman says Clarence Thomas is an “Uncle Tom,” Mitch McConnell is a “racist,” and that Republicans are only anti-big government and anti-Obamacare because President Obama is black. Rep. Bennie Thompson made the comments over the weekend while appearing on a New Nation of Islam radio program.

These remarks and the forum in which they were presented, have all the ingredients to make right-wingers’ heads explode. But nothing will happen. Bennie Thompson won’t be reprimanded. He won’t become national news. Meanwhile, the moment that Cliven Bundy opened his mouth about negros being better off picking cotton than being president of the United States, the shithammer came down on him. The moment that Donald Sterling’s racist remarks became known, the shithammer came down on him.

What does this tell you?

It tells me that we’re winning the culture war. We have a shithammer and they have a pea-shooter.

It also tells me that Bennie Thompson may have exaggerated and he may have engaged in a bit of hyperbole, but he isn’t so far off that it’s scandalous. In this political environment, which the Republicans have created, charges of racism have a bedrock credibility.

The following video is a little loud and slightly distorted as a result, so you may want to turn it down a bit. I have two older brothers, one of whom is 13 years older and one of whom is 10 years older. The one who is closer in age largely determined my early musical tastes, and mostly for the good. When he introduced me to Roy Buchanan, he did me a great service. But, I happen to know that Can I Change My Mind is a favorite of both of my brothers whose musical tastes have never intersected all that much. This means that all three of us think this song is one of the most meaningful songs in our lives. And that means a lot to me.

Update [2014-4-30 13:17:14 by BooMan]: Here’s a documentary on Roy.

Scolding and scorning racist or anti-gay speech is completely consistent with the First Amendment. It creates a quasi-taboo that is not enforced legally, but through shame and lost business. It doesn’t eradicate racism or homophobia but it marginalizes them and forces them underground. They aren’t considered decent, cultured, or respectable points of view. But, some people are deeply uncomfortable that a CEO was forced out his job for opposing gay equality or that an NBA owner can be banned for life and forced to sell his team because he was caught on tape making private racist remarks.

Both cases involve people in leadership positions whose views reflect on the reputations of the organizations they led or were a part of. In the case of Donald Sterling, the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers basketball team, he agreed to certain stipulations when he became an owner. Basically, he gave up some of his right to say whatever he wants, even in the privacy of his own home. Employees can be fired making racist statements, so it’s only fitting that employers can be fired for the same offense.

Perhaps the only available defense for Sterling is that he had no way of knowing that his remarks would ever become public and so he isn’t responsible for the damage his remarks did to the reputation of the National Basketball Association. In this very limited sense, he can argue that he isn’t at fault and did not violate any of the league’s bylaws or policies. But, for league leadership, the players, the other owners, the coaches, and the fans, it hardly matters how the remarks came to light because they created an immediate crisis.

For a wide array of reasons, Sterling could not continue on as an owner. For one, the Clippers would never be able to attract another free agent. College talent would pledge never to play for the Clippers. Fans would boycott the team, both at home and on the road. Sponsors would abandon the team, and perhaps even the league. The players on the roster would be in an objectively hostile workplace with no expectation of fair treatment.

It was obvious that Sterling was simply incapable of atoning for his racism or redeeming himself in a time period compatible with the need for the team to conduct ongoing operations.

He had to go. And I think it just isn’t all that applicable to other situations. I mean, it might not seem quite right that a man was surreptitiously recorded in his own house, and that he was stripped of his team as a result despite not having committed any crime in a legal sense. But weighing that “not quite right” against the much larger “completely wrong” things he said, it’s a bit lop-sided, don’t you think?

I know some people are miffed that Sterling was considered an okay owner when he was committing massive housing discrimination and only got in trouble over the comparatively minor offense of being a racist in his own living room. That’s a fair point. We can talk about that. But that doesn’t mean late isn’t better than never.

Isn’t it good to know that the Karzai government’s torturer in chief has managed to get asylum in the United States? Doesn’t it comfort you to know that he’s living in a “pink two-story house in Southern California, on a street of stucco homes on the outskirts of Los Angeles”?

You can read the whole thing if you want to be really depressed. The legacy of the Bush years just keeps getting worse. We don’t really have a leg to stand on. The CIA basically hired this guy, gave him all the resources he needed, handed over prisoners to him for years, and then (probably) arranged for him to come here when he became too much of an embarrassment abroad.

Did I expect that the US could have convinced the Afghans to be gentle to their prisoners after decades of civil and ethnic war? No. But I did expect that we would at least set a guiding example. And we didn’t. Our own torturer in chief walks free and pens columns defending torture in the Washington Post. So, what happened to that shining city on a hill?

I just want someone held accountable, even if they shop at Richard Cohen’s Safeway.

Would any American object to paying an additional penny/pound to those that pick the tomatoes that we eat in our salads and on our hamburgers and tacos?  That wouldn’t feel that the piece work rate for tomato harvesters of $0.50 for 32 pounds is unfair?  (464 pounds/hour of back-breaking work to earn the $7.25/hour minimum wage.)  That a mere penny/pound is all it takes to make these workers lives immeasurably better?

That along with more humane working conditions and better enforcement against modern-slavery was all the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) have been asking for since 2001.  The organizing has been difficult and successes slow to materialize.  That first penny was achieved in 2005 when TacoBell bowed to the pressure of a boycott.  Whole Foods came on board in 2008.  Then:

In 2010, the CIW and the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange signed an agreement that spurred the full implementation of the Fair Food Program (FFP), a groundbreaking model for social responsibility based on a unique partnership among farmworkers, Florida tomato growers, and participating buyers.  The Program is a comprehensive, verifiable and sustainable approach to ensuring better wages and working conditions in Florida’s tomato fields.

This year Wal-Mart joined.   There are a few major restaurants and grocery store chains hold-outs and no way to project which way they’ll go.  For now the harvesters will be seeing a significant increase in their income.  They earned it.  They deserve it. Bravo!

It’s such a novel and ingenious real solution to a real and pressing problem that cheering for those workers is the only humane response.  Except for those of a certain age, there’s a sad and uncomfortable echo.  Another time and place when The Harvest of Shame was supposed to have been fixed for generations to come.  When Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers raised the political conscience and consciousness of all decent Americans.  With my ruminations on this in a muddle, the existence of Cesar Chavez, the film, came to my attention.

The biopic movie genre more often fails than succeeds.  It’s a tricky act to pull off even for the best of directors and actors (Lincoln)  “Cesar Chavez” succeeds despite a few shortcomings, and Diego Luna, the director, can be proud of this work.   It’s excellent in its depiction of time and place.  What the struggle was about and how incredibly difficult meager changes were to achieve.  Michael Peña  as Chavez is very good.  As is John Malkovich and almost the entire cast.  The screenplay – both storytelling and dialogue – is strong.  It made me cry (and that’s not easy to do).  The use of archival news footage is particularly effective and well-done.  It’s an honest movie.  Up to a point.  

The anti-union and anti-worker forces retreated but didn’t stop fighting back.  The UFW membership peaked at 100,000 in the 1970s and today numbers close to 5,000.  However, Luna doesn’t neglect to include the dark forces that grew later and  subverted much of the UFW efforts.  The faces are there and they are chilling.  And the destruction they wrought on this country wasn’t limited to farm-workers but all workers.

“Cesar Chavez” is a movie worth supporting with your time and money.  A reminder that we mustn’t forget just causes.  Or those that paid such a huge price to enlighten others as to the just cause.  And that it does live on in the CIW and Fair Foods Standards Council.