PoliGazette

U.S. Muslim Leaders Denounce Al Qaeda Slur Toward Obama

2008-11-22T11:06:07Z

Spiritual leaders of New York’s African-American Muslim communities lashed out at extremist terrorist organization Al Qaeda on Friday after the organization had released a tape on which the group’s number two can be heard using racial slurs against president-elect Barack Obama.

In the tape, Ayman al-Zawahiri calls Obama a “house negro.”

The American imams called the recorded comments ”an insult” from people who have “historically been disconnected from the African-American community generally and Muslim African-Americans in particular.”

“We find it insulting when anyone speaks for our community instead of giving us the dignity and the honor of speaking for ourselves,” they said in a statement read during a news conference at the Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial, Educational and Cultural Center.

Not only did Zawahiri call Obama a house negro, he also compared them unfavorably to “honorable Americans” like Malcolm X in the message.

Of course, the American leaders are correct to speak out against Al Qaeda. Too often Muslims hear that they do not ‘condemn’ Al Qaeda and groups like it enough. As such, this condemnation serves as an example of Muslim condemnation of Al Qaeda and its message of hatred.

But the real problem with al-Zawahiri’s comments were not the racial slurs he used. The real problem is his extremism and his advocacy of terrorism. These Imams should have used the opportunity to lash out at Al Qaeda and its violent ideology in general. They should have condemned the organization itself in its entirety and explained why they believe that Al Qaeda’s leaders are not good Muslims.

That would have sent a much stronger message.

The Barrio Azteca Trial and the Prison Gang-Cartel Interface

2008-11-21T23:20:27Z

This is a guest post by Fred Burton and Ben West.

On Nov. 3, a U.S. District Court in El Paso, Texas, began hearing a case concerning members of a criminal enterprise that calls itself Barrio Azteca (BA). The group members face charges including drug trafficking and distribution, extortion, money laundering and murder. The six defendants include the organization’s three bosses, Benjamin Alvarez, Manuel Cardoza and Carlos Perea; a sergeant in the group, Said Francisco Herrera; a lieutenant, Eugene Mona; and an associate, Arturo Enriquez.

The proceedings represent the first major trial involving BA, which operates in El Paso and West Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. The testimony is revealing much about how this El Paso-based prison gang operates, and how it interfaces with Mexican drug cartel allies that supply its drugs.

Mexico’s cartels are in the business of selling drugs like marijuana, cocaine and heroin in the United States. Large amounts of narcotics flow north while large amounts of cash and weapons flow south. Managing these transactions requires that the cartels have a physical presence in the United States, something a cartel alliance with a U.S. gang can provide.

Of course, BA is not the only prison gang operating in the United States with ties to Mexico. Prison gangs can also be called street gangs — they recruit both in prisons and on the street. Within the United States, there are at least nine well-established prison gangs with connections to Mexican drug cartels; Hermanos de Pistoleros Latinos, the Mexican Mafia and the Texas Syndicate are just a few such groups. Prison gangs like BA are very territorial and usually cover only a specific region, so one Mexican cartel might work with three to four prison or street gangs in the United States. Like BA, most of the U.S. gangs allied with Mexican cartels largely are composed of Mexican immigrants or Mexican-Americans. Nevertheless, white supremacist groups, mixed-race motorcycle gangs and African-American street gangs also have formed extensive alliances with Mexican cartels.

Certainly, not all U.S. gangs the Mexican cartels have allied with are the same. But examining how BA operates offers insights into how other gangs — like the Latin Kings, the Texas Syndicate, the Sureños, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and transnational street gangs like MS-13 — operate in alliance with the cartels.

Barrio Azteca Up Close

Spanish for “Aztec Neighborhood,” BA originated in a Texas state penitentiary in 1986, when five inmates from El Paso organized the group as a means of protection in the face of the often-brutal ethnic tensions within prisons. By the 1990s, BA had spread to other prisons and had established a strong presence on the streets of El Paso as its founding members served their terms and were released. Reports indicate that in the late 1990s, BA had begun working with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman’s Sinaloa Federation drug trafficking organization, which at the time controlled drug shipments to Ciudad Juarez, El Paso’s sister city across the Rio Grande.

According to testimony from several different witnesses on both sides of the current trial, BA now works only with the Juarez cartel of Vicente Carrillo-Fuentes, which has long controlled much of Mexico’s Chihuahua state and Ciudad Juarez, and broke with the Sinaloa Federation earlier in 2008. BA took sides with the Juarez cartel, with which it is jointly running drugs across the border at the Juarez plaza.

BA provides the foot soldiers to carry out hits at the behest of Juarez cartel leaders. On Nov. 3, 10 alleged BA members in Ciudad Juarez were arrested in connection with 12 murders. The suspects were armed with four AK-47s, pistols and radio communication equipment — all hallmarks of a team of hit menready to carry out a mission.

According to testimony from the ongoing federal case, which is being brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, drugs are taken at discount from the supplier on the Mexico side and then distributed to dealers on the street. These distributors must then pay “taxes” to BA collectors to continue plying their trade. According to testimony from Josue Aguirre, a former BA member turned FBI informant, BA collects taxes from 47 different street-level narcotics operations in El Paso alone. Failure to pay these taxes results in death. One of the murder charges in the current RICO case involves the death of an El Paso dealer who failed to pay up when the collectors arrived to collect on a debt.

Once collected, the money goes in several different directions. First, BA lieutenants and captains, the midlevel members, receive $50 and $200 per month respectively for compensation. The bulk of BA’s profit is then transferred using money orders to accounts belonging to the head bosses (like Alvarez, Cardoza and Perea) in prison. Cash is also brought back to Ciudad Juarez to pay the Juarez cartel, which provided the drugs in the first place.

BA receives discounts on drugs from the Juarez cartel by providing tactical help to its associates south of the border. Leaders of Carrillo Fuentes’ organization in Juarez can go into hiding in El Paso under BA protection if their lives are in danger in Juarez. They can also order BA to track down cartel enemies hiding in El Paso. Former BA member Gustavo Gallardo testified in 2005 that he was sent to pick up a man in downtown El Paso who had cheated the Juarez cartel of money. Once Gallardo dropped him off at a safe house in El Paso, another team took the man — who was bound with rope and duct tape — to Ciudad Juarez, where Gallardo assumes he was killed.

BA and the World of Prison Gangs

Prison gangs are endemic to prison systems, where safety for inmates comes in numbers. Tensions (usually along racial lines) among dangerous individuals regularly erupt into deadly conflict. Prison gang membership affords a certain amount of protection against rival groups and offers fertile recruiting ground.

Once a prison gang grows its membership (along with its prestige) and establishes a clear hierarchy, its leader can wield an impressive amount of power. Some even wind up taking over prisons, like the antecedents of Russian organized crime did.

It might seem strange that members on the outside send money and answer to bosses in prison, since the bosses are locked up. But these bosses wield a great deal of influence over gang members in and out of prison. Disobedience is punishable by death, and regardless of whether a boss is in prison, he can order a hit on a member who has crossed him. Prison gang members also know that if they end up in prison again — a likely outcome — they will once again be dependent on the help of the boss to stay alive, and can perhaps even earn some money while doing time.

BA’s illegal activities mean its members constantly cycle in and out of prison. Many BA members were involved in smaller, local El Paso street gangs before they were imprisoned. Once in prison, they joined BA with the sponsorship of a “godfather” who walks the recruit through the process. BA then performs a kind of background check on new recruits by circulating their name throughout the organization. BA is particularly interested in any evidence that prospective members have cooperated with the police.

Prison authorities are certainly aware of the spread of BA, and they try to keep Mexican nationals separated from known BA members, who are mostly Mexican-American, to prevent the spread of the gang’s influence. BA has organizations in virtually every penitentiary in Texas, meaning that no matter where a BA member is imprisoned, he will have a protection network in place. BA members with truly extensive prison records might personally know the leader of every prison chapter, thus increasing the member’s prestige. Thus, the constant cycling of members from the outside world into prison does not inhibit BA, but makes its members more cohesive, as it allows the prison system to increase bonds among gang members.

Communication challenges certainly arise, as exchanges between prisoners and those on the outside are closely monitored. But BA seems to have overcome this challenge. Former BA member Edward Ruiz testified during the trial that from 2003 to 2007, he acted as a clearinghouse for jailed members’ letters and packages, which he then distributed to members on the outside. This tactic ensured that all prison communications would be traceable to just one address, thus not revealing the location of other members.

BA also allegedly used Sandy Valles New, who worked in the investigations section of the Office of the Federal Public Defender in El Paso from 1996 to 2002, to pass communications between gang members inside and outside prison. She exploited the access to — and the ability to engage in confidential communications with — inmates that attorneys enjoy, transmitting information back and forth between BA members inside and outside prison. Taped conversations reveal New talking to one of the bosses and lead defendants, Carlos Perea, about her fear of losing her job and thus not being able to continue transmitting information in this way. She also talked of crossing over to Ciudad Juarez to communicate with BA members in Mexico.

While BA had inside sources like New assisting it, the FBI was able to infiltrate BA in return. Josue Aguirre and Johnny Michelleti have informed on BA activities to the FBI since 2003 and 2005, respectively. Edward Ruiz, the mailman, also handed over stacks of letters to the FBI.

BA and the Mexican Cartels

As indicated, BA is only one of dozens of prison gangs operating along the U.S.-Mexican border that help Mexican drug trafficking organizations smuggle narcotics across the border and then distribute them for the cartels. Mexican drug trafficking organizations need groups that will do their bidding on the U.S. side of the border, as the border is the tightest choke point in the narcotics supply chain.

Getting large amounts of drugs across the border on a daily basis requires local connections to bribe border guards or border town policemen. Gangs on the U.S. side of the border also have contacts who sell drugs on the retail level, where markups bring in large profits. The current trial has revealed that the partnership goes beyond narcotics to include violence as well. In light of the high levels of violence raging in Mexico related to narcotics trafficking, there is a genuine worry that this violence (and corruption) could spread inside the United States.

One of the roles that BA and other border gangs fill for Mexican drug-trafficking organizations is that of enforcer. Prison gangs wield tight control over illegal activity in a specific territory. They keep tabs on people to make sure they are paying their taxes to the gang and not affiliating with rival gangs. To draw an analogy, they are like the local police who know the situation on the ground and can enforce specific rules handed down by a governmental body — or a Mexican cartel.

Details emerging from the ongoing trial indicate that BA works closely with the Juarez cartel and has contributed to drug-related violence inside the United States. While the killing of a street dealer by a gang for failure to pay up on time is common enough nationwide and hardly unique to Mexican drug traffickers, apprehending offenders in El Paso and driving them to Ciudad Juarez to be held or killed does represent a very clear link between violence in Mexico and the United States.

BA’s ability to strike within the United States has been proven. According to a Stratfor source, BA is connected to Los Zetas — the U.S.-trained Mexican military members who deserted to traffic drugs — through a mutual alliance with the Juarez cartel. The Zetas possess a high level of tactical skill that could be passed along to BA, thus increasing its effectiveness.

The Potential for Cross-Border Violence

The prospect for enhanced cross-border violence is frightening, but the violence itself is not new. So far, Mexican cartels and their U.S. allies have focused on those directly involved in the drug trade. Whether this restraint will continue is unclear. Either way, collateral damage is always a possibility.

Previous incidents, like one that targeted a drug dealer in arrears in Phoenix and others that involved kidnappings and attacks against U.S. Border Patrol agents, indicate that violence has already begun creeping over from Mexico. So far, violence related to drug trafficking has not caused the deaths of U.S. law enforcement officials and/or civilians, though it has come close to doing so.

Another potential incubator of cross-border violence exists in BA’s obligation to offer refuge to Juarez cartel members seeking safety in the United States. Such members most likely would have bounties on their heads. The more violent Mexico (and particularly Ciudad Juarez) becomes, the greater the risk Juarez cartel leaders face — and the more pressure they will feel to seek refuge in the United States. As more Juarez cartel leaders cross over and hide with BA help, the cartel’s enemies will become increasingly tempted to follow them and kill them in the United States. Other border gangs in California, Arizona and New Mexico probably are following this same trajectory.

Two primary reasons explain why Mexican cartel violence for the most part has stopped short of crossing the U.S. border. First, the prospect of provoking U.S. law enforcement does not appeal to Mexican drug-trafficking organizations operating along the border. They do not want to provoke a coordinated response from a highly capable federal U.S. police force like the Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or FBI. By keeping violence at relatively low levels and primarily aimed at other gang members and drug dealers, the Mexican drug-trafficking organizations can lessen their profile in the eyes of these U.S. agencies. Conversely, any increase in violence and/or the killing of U.S. police or civilians would dramatically increase federal scrutiny and retaliation.

The second reason violence has not crossed the border wholesale is that gangs like BA are in place to enforce the drug-trafficking organizations’ rules. The need to send cartel members into the United States to kill a disobedient drug dealer is reduced by having a tight alliance with a border gang that keeps drugs and money moving smoothly and carries out the occasional killing to maintain order.

But the continued integrity of BA and its ability to carry out the writ of larger drug-trafficking organizations in Mexico might not be so certain. The Nov. 3 trial will undermine BA activity in the crucial trafficking corridor of El Paso/Ciudad Juarez.

The indictment and possible incarceration of the six alleged BA members would not damage the gang so badly — after all, BA is accustomed to operating out of prison, and there must certainly be members on the outside ready to fill in for their incarcerated comrades. But making BA’s activities and modus operandi public should increase scrutiny on the gang and could very well lead to many more arrests.

In light of the presence of at least two FBI informants in the gang, BA leaders have probably moved into damage control mode, isolating members jeopardized by the informants. This will disrupt BA’s day-to-day operations, making it at least temporarily less effective. Stratfor sources say BA members on both sides of the border have been ordered to lie low until the trial is over and the damage can be fully assessed. This is a dangerous period for gangs like BA, as their influence over their territory and ability to operate is being reduced.

Weakening BA by extension weakens the Juarez cartel’s hand in El Paso. While BA no doubt will survive the investigations the trial probably will spawn, given the high stakes across the border in Mexico, the Juarez cartel might be forced to reduce its reliance on BA. This could prompt the Juarez cartel to rely on its own members in Ciudad Juarez to carry out hits in the United States and to provide its own security to leaders seeking refuge in the United States. It could also prompt it to turn to a new gang facing less police scrutiny. Under either scenario, BA’s territory would be encroached upon. And considering the importance of controlling territory to prison gangs — and the fact that BA probably still will be largely intact — this could lead to increased rivalries and violence.

The Juarez cartel-BA dynamic could well apply to alliances between U.S. gangs and Mexican drug-trafficking organizations, such as Hermanos de Pistoleros Latinos in Houston, the Texas Syndicate and Tango Blast operating in the Rio Grande Valley and their allies in the Gulf cartel; the Mexican Mafia in California and Texas and its allies in the Tijuana and Sinaloa cartels; and other gangs operating in the United States with ties to Mexican cartels like Mexikanemi, Norteños and the Sureños.

Ultimately, just because BA or any other street gang working with Mexican cartels is weakened does not mean that the need to enforce cartel rules and supply chains disappears. This could put Mexican drug-trafficking organizations on a collision course with U.S. law enforcement if they feel they must step in themselves to take up the slack. As their enforcers stateside face more legal pressure, the cartels’ response therefore bears watching.

Fred Burton and Ben West both work for Stratfor.com; the best online intelligence source, where this post appeared first.

It is a Sick World: Teen’s Suicide Streamed Live on Internet

2008-11-21T23:13:57Z

When a Florida teen streamed his own suicide live on the Internet, many thought it was a hoax. They continued to believe so until cops found the body of 19-year-old Abraham Biggs Jr.

Others were watching young Abraham die from an overdosis online. They looked at him and did nothing.

Research indicates that Biggs did not only kill himself, and that others watched him do so, but that some viewers may even have encouraged him.

The suicide was streamed live on Justin.tv. The video and comments were taken off afterwards, but other sites have published a video of Bigg lying still, in a fetus position, on his bed when cops come in and switch off the camera.

It is as of yet unclear whether viewers truly actively participated in Biggs’ death or whether they were passive bystanders. We also do not know whether all those viewing thought it was a hoax; from comments in online forums one gets the distinct impression that most thought it was a joke. Some of these viewers contacted the police when they became increasingly worried that it may have been real after all.

Most is not all, of course. It is not difficult to image that at least some thought it was real, yet did nothing. Additionally, one wonders why it is that so many seemed to have been willing to take the risk.

This is a clear case of individual responsibility: Biggs killed himself, he is responsible for that act. But since so many people saw him die, they too had the responsibility to act. They should have informed Justin.tv that someone was either making a sick joke or that he was actually killing himself before a camera for all to see.

Meanwhile, one cannot help but wonder what is happening to the world and mankind. It is difficult to imagine that people would have watched Biggs die 50 or 100 years ago, as if suicide was cool.

Clinton for State, Geithner for Treasury

2008-11-21T22:13:59Z

It seems like the trickle of cabinet appointments is turning into a stream for the growing Obama administration. Hillary Clinton has reportedly accepted the offer for Secretary of State. The two main obstacles: her husbands conflicts of interest and whether she was actually interested, seem to have been worked out. Though they were somewhat different on matters of foreign policy, I don’t believe Clinton will be a rogue player within the administration. She’s disciplined and she knows which way the wind blows. I think she will be a reliable asset to Obama.

What could actually be a much more important post, given the state of the economy, appears to have been filled today. Timothy Geithner seems to be the man who will have the unenviable task of overseeing the countries economy in it’s worst moment since the Great Depression. Geithner is currently president of the New York reserve bank.

Energy Independence

2008-11-21T14:46:58Z

A lot of time has been spent on solar energy in recent days, down here in the Netherlands. Quite some profound newspapers and magazines (among which Elsevier, which is the Dutch conservative version of Time) are busily informing readers about the profound impact solar energy could have.

If Western governments are willing to invest in energy, Elsevier explained, we could provide 80 times the energy we need on a yearly basis. 80 times.

Of course, transforming the current system into entirely solar based will take years, decades even, and it will cost a tremendous amount of money. Other research has indicated that Western economies could indeed even suffer tremendously, possibly collapse if we would take this gigantic step.

But something has to change nonetheless. It is silly for us to depend on foreign oil and other energy sources that are wasteful, limited, costly and that make us dependent on other, often hostile governments.

So, if solar energy could take care of some of our needs but if we would ruin our economy if we would truly launch a massive project aimed at making solar energy our sole source of energy what can we do? The answer is simple: aside from solar power we should use wind and nuclear power.

Nuclear power is ‘dirty’ and it is difficult to get rid of the ‘garbage,’ but it is also highly effective and relatively affortable. Every single country in the West, in the world actually, could build nuclear facilities, which can be built much safer today than a few decades ago.

Wind power is quite similar to solar power of course; it is clean, but costly for us to invest in on a massive scale.

A balance has to be found between those three energy sources if we want to be able to function without ruining our economy and we have to take our time. There is no need to act as if we, the West, have to become energy independent in five years time.

The above has, of course, been noted by many others. The following has not, or, at least, it has not gotten the attention it deserves: what will happen to countries we depend so heavily on for oil now? What would happen to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran and others if we would use solar, wind and nuclear power?

The answer is that these countries’ economies will collapse. They will be ruined. The collapse will be so devastating that massive riots, possibly civil wars will break out. Fathers will not be able to buy food for their children. Mothers will not be able to buy or even knit clothes for them let alone themselves. These economies depend so heavily on oil that our energy revolution would ruin them completely, leaving nothing behind except for massive instability.

As we have learned in the last couple of decades, instability in other parts of the world, and especially in Africa and the Middle East, causes instability at home. The more poverty exists in the Middle East, the more youngers will radicalize and the more likely it is that extremists will take over. They will use these countries as platforms for terrorist attacks against the West and it interests. In short, a massive Western energy revolution would make the world much less safe.

This means that when we commit ourselves to aforementioned revolution, we will need to come up with a plan for oil producing and exporting countries. It means we will have to invest in them, we will have to help them become less dependent on oil.

In turn, this means that we will have to spend many billions, trillions even perhaps, more. An energy revolution is not limited to ourselves. Its impact spreads throughout the world, it will influence many lives. Millions will lose their job and their home. Unless we help them.

It would be great to see politicians taking this subject seriously and articulate plans that would make us less dependent on foreign governments, and on oil, while explaining how they would help those governments deal with the loss in oil sales.

Until they do, all the talk about an energy revolution, let alone energy independence, should be considered void and useless.

Intellectual Elites

2008-11-21T15:53:37Z

Much has been made of the fact that the President Elect is a Harvard man, and the Governor of Alaska went to a variety of colleges before graduating from a small state public university. Yet the great irony that the media paid no attention to was the question of which candidates were more likely to have lives that are similar to the majority of Americans. And in that case, Governor Palin is probably much more typical than Senator Obama, or many politicians, most of whom have some lucky breaks.

One of the things the Democratic party keeps telling us is that it champions good education. Harvard certainly is a good education, but it is not where most of us go. Palin’s experience is one that many of the under 40 age group can relate to. And, while it was under reported, it is worth noting that she participated in school sports and maintained a good GPA. Then there was the question of the Chicago schools. No one seems to have asked William Ayers any pointed questions about educational policy. But one more set of questions might be worth examining, if there ar actually nay investigative journalists left. Have any in the media heard of Marva Collins?

Marva Collins began making a name for her self in the 1970s. She found the Chicago public schools to be failed institutions, which were not educating black and poor children, and claimed that they were not educable. Miss Collins started inner city schooling that provided a good solid education based on classics and excellence. The pupils in her classes excelled, often reading well above grade level. Her classes stressed standard English, math, logic, literature - a good solid curriculum.

A question for the so-called journalists - Why is it that academics in Chicago are seeking out an educational failure like William Ayers, instead of an educational success like Marva Collins? Another question: Is is true that Miss Collins was able to get good results at a cost per pupil of approximately half the per pupil cost of the failing Chicago public schools? Why? Why is no one interested? Do you suppose the underlying lack of interest has something to do with the fact that both Marva Collins and Sarah Palin placed performance ahead of everything else in their educations?

Something to ponder. Yes, Harvard is good. But it isn’t the only way to get a good education.

Creativity in the Blogosphere

2008-11-21T22:35:47Z

I have been a member of the blogosphere for several years now: I started out with a small blog called Liberty and Justice and commenting at other blogs. After a while, Joe Gandelman of The Moderate Voice contacted me and asked me whether I would like to contribute to his blog. I gladly accepted and, over time, became assistant editor. I then founded a new blog, the Van der Galien Gazette, which grew increasingly bigger, after which we relaunched as PoliGazette.

In short, when it comes to the blogosphere I know what I am talking about.

After all these years, my general attitude towards the blogosphere has evolved. I once considered blogging a nice hobby, later I understood that blogs could have real impact, again later I became convinced that blogs could be even bigger than I anticipated and now, today, I have come to a different conclusion. Again.

This conclusion is this: there are a lot of blogs out there that could have real impact. Hopefully PoliGazette will be one of them. But the blogosphere itself is suffering from a major problem: no ideas.

Blogging about politics revolves around ideas. When you create a blog, you believe you have something to add to the discussion. If you do not, you might as well become a passive blogreader, who reads blogposts, comments on them every now and then perhaps, but who is weary to start a blog of his own.

Yet, what seems to have happened in the last two years is that increasingly more people, who offer no fresh, new ideas of their own, have started to blog and that those who once did have fresh perspectives have gradually evolved into more of the same.

When you read right wing blogs or left wing blogs, even prominent ones, you will quickly notice that they all say the same. There are only a few out there that offer profound, new ideas and perspectives. Most do not. When you go to one left wing blog you generally know what they will write about and what their opinion will be. The same goes for right wing blogs. Big blogs, average blogs, small blogs; no matter, they repeat the standard talking points, not realizing that they are part of the collective suicide of the blogosphere.

To me, the blogosphere resembles popular music: we all pretend that Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera are inherently different, but deep down we know they are the same. They change the presention a little bit, but in general, it are two beautiful blondes, who sing the same crappy love songs.

The same goes for blogs. Conservative bloggers are, in 99% of the cases, simply the same. They repeat what the other says, they have the same opinions. Every now and then a small difference is visible which gives readers the impression they are truly dealing with completely different people, much like Britney and Christina.

But this is not the case. They are almost carbon copies of each other. Pretending otherwise is foolish.

Which leads me to the following: creativity is missing from a medium founded on it. Creativity is vital to the survival of the blogosphere, without it, it will die. If current trends continue I fear that blogs will lose their value, and will truly be places where those who already agree with each other on a number of issues congratulate themselves with how smart they are.

We need more creativity in the ’sphere’ as a whole. Without it, we’ll be mere tools for partisans and especially politicians who do not have solid policies but only their own personal ambitions in mind.

Award for Drama Queen of the Year: Washington Post

2008-11-21T05:54:11Z

Part of my studies in communications was a writing intensive course that the professor heavily veered toward print journalism. So I’m well aware of the creative license that goes into writing a feature story. But this Washington Post article about Senator John McCain’s return to Washington takes the cake. Talk about depressing.

By the time I was done reading it, it left me wanting to write McCain a “we’re with ya, kiddo” letter to him. Of course, WaPo has now admitted their biases, so that may explain things. The article did have a distinct “it’s the end of the political line for him” feel to it.

US Attorney General Mukasey Collapses

2008-11-21T05:41:01Z

Via Fox News:

The 67-year-old Mukasey was rushed to George Washington University Hospital, where his condition was not immediately known.

…

Mukasey’s was noticeably shaking during his speech before he collapsed shortly before 10:20 p.m. EST. His security detail called 911.

Mukasey was on the stage for 10 minutes being attended to by his FBI detail before medics arrived, according to a Justice Department official who was there. Mukasey was still breathing at the time, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because she was not authorized to talk to the media.

An FBI official said Mukasey got stuck on a word during his speech to the conservative legal group, repeated it several times and then “went down hard.”

There’s not much else on his condition at the moment, but he appears to be okay:

O’Connor said about hour after Mukasey collapsed that the last information he had was that the attorney general was alert and conscious and speaking.

I’m not a doctor but I immediately thought “stroke” upon hearing the symptoms. Wouldn’t be uncommon for someone his age. Anyway, hope he’s all right.

Sued, eHarmony Must Couple Gays

2008-11-20T23:59:34Z

In 2005, eHarmony, a leading on-line matchmaking service, began to fight a discrimination lawsuit filed by a gay man in New Jersey. In 2007, the state’s attorney general found probable cause that eHarmony had violated N.J.’s Law Against Discrimination. Today the company gave in to legal pressure and agreed to pair homosexual couples.

By strong-arming eHarmony into complying with the state’s view of morality, New Jersey eliminated one more small opponent of homosexuality and opened the door to an untold variety of similar nuisance suits in coming years.

Incidentally, this is the exact pattern that social conservatives want to avoid in the gay marriage fight - big government bullying its way into the matter and imposing a solution that’s not what people want.

This is a setback for free markets and image-conscious companies like eHarmony that would prefer to cater to clients of their own choosing.

Melissa Clouthier says:

These kind of suits make my blood boil. Ditto for women who want access to certain sorts of men’s clubs. People should be able to form groups based on any diverse characteristic they want. It’s called FREEDOM. It may not be politically correct. It may be a stupid group. But that’s what freedom is all about–you’re as free to be an idiot as you are to be smart. It’s up to you. Well, it should be.

Contrary to what’s popular opinion in some circles, there is no Constitutional or moral guarantee that any of us are going to be happy with our lives, live them out in an offense-free bubble, and have our way on every little issue that comes up.

What about the rights of eHarmony’s owners? What about the rights of heterosexual eHarmony users, many of whom will find the new look and feel of the site distasteful?

What about the government’s ability to discipline itself not to act when it’s not needed?