I was reading this article at the New York Times and was amazed at the introduction and how something it was…

When the International Criminal Court issued its arrest warrant for Sudan’s president on Wednesday, an 8-year-old boy named Bakit Musa would have clapped — if only he still had hands.

You can read the rest here. Just thought it was a very weird and cliche introduction. Something made me laugh though as if it was from SNL even though it is a terrible terrible situation.

The next time someone tells you that they prefer the judicial “conservatism” or “modesty” of Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito, because it limits the discretion of unelected judges, please kindly them refer to these justices’ recent opinion in Herring v. United States, No. 07-513, decided today. Because they’re wrong.

The Exclusionary Rule is a well founded doctrine of constitutional law. Generally, the Exclusionary Rule provides that any evidence obtained as a result of a 4th Amendment violation is inadmissable at trial. End of discussion. No judicial analysis or interpretation required. (Well…, I’m simplifying this a bit.) The Rule serves as the only deterrent against governmental violation of the 4th Amendment rights. Without the Exclusionary Rule, evidence obtained as a result of a unconstitutional search or seizure could be admitted against you.

In Herring, the conservative wing plus Justice Kennedy determined that the Exclusionary Rule is not absolute. Rather, judges must engage in a fact-intensive, case-by-case balancing test. Under the Herring decision,

To trigger the exclusionary rule, police conduct must be sufficiently deliberate that exclusion can meaningfully deter it, and sufficiently culpable that such deterrence is worth the price paid by the justice system.

The effect of this open-ended standard is, of course, to subject the Exclusionary Rule to substantial judicial discretion and personal bias– the exact opposite of what the conservative wing purports to espouse.

Many have decried the proposed government bailout currently being rammed down our collective throat as “socialism”. I want argue the opposite, however: that the proposed government bailout is really fascism. Let’s agree that socialism is roughly defined as the government command and control of private business, and fascism the command and control of government by private business.

In tax circles, the “Wall Street Rule” refers to the de facto rule that, given any transaction or investment for which the tax treatment is unclear because of the absence of IRS guidance, after enough investors have developed expectations of a given tax treatment, the IRS will not upset those expectations even though it is under no legal obligation to do so.

Thus, the Wall Street Rule is a rule under which private business effectively usurps the IRS regulating function by dictating the tax treatment of a certain investment or transaction and “forcing” the IRS to concede to such treatment.

The behavior of the stock market over the past few days seems to be another instance of the Wall Street Rule in a slightly different context. After two days of grievous losses, stocks rebounded spectacularly on last Friday, just on the rumor of a possible bailout. And today, after news that both Democrats and Republicans, for populists and libertarian principles respectively, sought to stymie or modify the proposed bailout, stocks again dived.

Thus, the stock market have painted our Congress into an untenable corner. The market has developed an expectation that Congress will approve an unfettered bailout, and quickly. If Congress fails to deliver, stocks will plunge, and Congress will be left holding the political bag. Congress, understanding this, is therefore forced to pass the bailout Wall Street has come to expect. And so you have fascism: private business usurping the legislative function of Congress to get the bailout it wants.

If you haven’t visited www.ted.com, now is the time. The site offers tons of “inspired talks by the world’s greatest thinkers and doers.”

Here’s their quick self-summary:

“TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design. It started out in 1984 as a conference bringing together people from those three worlds. Since then its scope has become ever broader. The annual conference now brings together the world’s most fascinating thinkers and doers, who are challenged to give the talk of their lives (in 18 minutes). This site makes the best talks and performances from TED available to the public, for free. More than 200 talks from our archive are now available, with more added each week.”

This one, is far from the most interesting, but there’s an incredibly amazing octopus at the end that I think everyone needs to see.

least skip to the end where an octopus will blow you away.

What did Fox News expect when it decided to report live on location in the middle of a “leftist protest” in Denver? How about a mob spontaneously chanting “F#$% Fox News” on air!

H/t Crooks and Liars.

Bonus link.

My boys at Fox ‘n’ Friends are back at it: this time they’re trafficking in rumors regarding a couple of NYT staffers as retribution for publishing a “hit piece” against Fox News.

And as if the usual Fox ‘n’ Friends histrionics aren’t amusement enough, the show’s producers decided to Photoshop the pictures of the two offending NYT employees before splashing them on the screen (photos linked here and here). As NYT describes it,

“Mr. Reddicliffe looked like the wicked witch after a hard night of drinking, but it was the photo of Mr. Steinberg that stopped traffic when it appeared on the Web at Media Matters side by side with his actual photo. In a technique familiar to students of vintage German propaganda, his ears were pulled out, his teeth splayed apart, his forehead lowered and his nose was widened and enlarged in a way that made him look more like Fagin than the guy I work with. “

But here’s the cake-taker: Fox News doesn’t deny that they doctored the pictures. “A spokeswoman said … that altering photos for humorous effect is a common practice on cable news stations.”

As a regularly-disappointed/amused consumer of cable news, I’m glad to learn that Mr. TV Guy shares my view on the 24/7 coverage of Tim Russert’s death.

Here’s one thing you can say about journalists: Surely no one loves us as much as we love ourselves.

That’s one lesson of the Tim Russert coverage.

A friend told me Sunday: “I now know more about Tim Russert than I do many members of my family.”

The affection that Russert stirred in millions was testament to his skill. But the coverage of his death was often overblown, self-congratulatory and self-indulgent. It was no way to treat a news icon.

Updated 9.25 PM… No surprise, my boy Jack Shafer also takes the media to task:

I wonder whether the media grievers gave a moment of thought to how this Russert torrent they produced played with viewers and readers. Did the grievers really think Russert was so important, so vital to the nation’s course, and such an elevated human being that he deserved hour upon hour of tribute? I wonder whether any the responsible journalists paused to think, Hey, this is really weird. We’re using our unchecked editorial power to soak the nation with our tears about our friend, and that’s unseemly!

On days like this, I, too, hate the press.

He also notes that MSNBC will air live coverage of Russert’s private memorial service.

What’s not to love about this story:

1) That a group of white men in Indiana feel compelled to dress up in Nazi regalia to celebrate the birthday of Hilter? (Note the festive Happy Birthday sign on the front of the podium.)

2) That a Republican candidate for Congress spoke at the event (pictured)?

3) That he justified his appearance by likening Nazis to black people? (”I’ll speak before any group that invites me. I’ve spoken on an African-American radio station in Atlanta.”)

This article is it’s own punchline. Just sit back and enjoy.

H/t Slog.

I would like to propose we set a date to hang out at Daniel’s cabin or Las Vegas even if its just for a long weekend. Joel suggested Vegas and I think that is a solid idea. We can make this happen.

So what dates are good for everyone? Post in the comments so we can figure this out, I’ll update the thread as they come in.

Ben: I’m fine with either location and pretty easy on dates, maybe late summer or fall sometime?

Also, if this happens and it is at Daniel dad’s cabin maybe ahead of time we can order a Foosball table to be delivered? If we split it would be not too bad.

Thoughts? Ideas?

PS. I’m still in Cairo Egypt and will get back to the states in late June..

I’m not sure how many people besides Joel/Boo/Me are watching and loving Battlestar Galactica, but if you aren’t you should be. I just found this picture of the cast posing as Da Vinci’s Last Supper, as if the show didn’t have enough religious overtones….

Check out the picture here at Flickr.

Boo asked me to post this, its an awesome video talking about how the last West Wing election is very similar to the Obama McCain match up and why that is. Very interesting on how they basically predicted the type of candidates we would see. Or maybe that those are the only types of candidates we see and its a cycle.

Boo:

As a HUGE fan of the West Wing (at least when Aaron Sorkin was writing it) I find this utterly amazing…

To report the victories of Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain in the Virginia-Maryland-DC primaries, CNN chose to use on its front page the most unflattering photographs of the two men available to the network. Mr. McCain (right) was pictured to accentuate the deep and many folds of his disgustingly saggy neck skin. Mr. Obama (left) was pictured with a sickly yellow haze blemishing his skin. Both men were unavailable for comment.

Well, OK, maybe not number 9.

The McCain Way: Attack Republicans (A Top Ten List…) — posted on Mitt Romney’s official site. My favorite:

‘Are you calling me stupid?’ Sen. Chuck Grassley once inquired during a debate with McCain over the fate of the Vietnam MIAs, according to a source who was present. ‘No,’ replied McCain, ‘I’m calling you a f—ing jerk!’

And from the Why the Hell Would Romney Post this on his Website Department:

8. Sen. McCain Attacked Vice President Cheney. MCCAIN: “The president listened too much to the Vice President … Of course, the president bears the ultimate responsibility, but he was very badly served by both the Vice President and, most of all, the Secretary of Defense.” (Roger Simon, “McCain Bashes Cheney Over Iraq Policy,” The Politico, 1/24/07)

As a gimmick, the Democratic debate last night was sung entirely in improvisational doo-wop. If you missed it, then you missed quite a show. This NYT photo captures Clinton during her brilliant solo regarding health care reform.

Alas, if only President Bush took his advice. President Bush, during his press conference today, serving up a fat hypocritic sandwich:

On Turkey invading Iraq: We are making it very clear to Turkey that we don’t think it is in their interests to send troops into Iraq….

On Turkey surging its forces in Iraq: Actually, they have troops already stationed in Iraq, and they’ve had troops stationed there for quite a while. We don’t think it’s in their interests to send more troops in.

On Turkey’s intent to fight terrorism emanating from Iraq with military force rather than diplomacy: Iraq shares [Turkish] concerns about terrorist activities [emanating from Iraq], but that there’s a better way to deal with the issue than having the Turks send massive troops into the country — massive additional troops into the country…. There’s a lot of dialogue going on, and that’s positive. We are actively involved with the Turks and the Iraqis through a tripartite arrangement, and we’ll continue to — dialoguing with the Turks.

I’ve never met Debra Cagan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. In fact, I didn’t even know her office existed. But evidently, she has a problem with me.

To quote Ms. Cagan, “I hate all Iranians.”

All? Really, Ms. Cagan, all Iranians? Well, I hate all Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Coalition Affairs. Yes, all of them.

There’s more bad news for Mike Vick. A South Carolina inmate has filed a civil suit against Vick seeking “$63,000,000,000 billion dollars” in damages (yes, that would be $63,000,000,000,000,000,000) “backed by gold and silver “ to be delivered to the front gates to the Williamsburg Federal Correctional facility in South Carolina.

The facts in this dispute are complicated, but the allegations in the neatly hand-written complaint essentially boil down to the following:

1) Vick stole two white mixed pit bull dogs from the Plaintiff in Holiday, Fl.

2) Vick used the two dogs for his dogfighting operations in Richmond, Va.

3) Vick then proceeded to sell the stolen dogs on eBay and “used the proceeds to purchase missiles from the Iran government” because he needed the missiles as part of his pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda.

4) Vick stole the Plaintiff’s “identity from [the Plaintiff's] coat, and used it to open accounts at various pet stores to purchase food for the stolen dogs.

Other miscellaneous allegations include

5) Vick violated copyright law (referred to by the Plaintiff as “my copyright laws”) “by using the “Plaintiff’s copyright name on his personal football outfit and casual clothing.”

6) Vick “subjected [the Plaintiff] to microwave testing.”

7) And, finally, “Vick used drugs in school zones.”

In addition to the”$63,000,000,000 billion dollars backed by gold and silver”, the Plaintiff asks the court to issue a temporary restraining order against Vick so that Vick will “stop physically hurting my feelings and dashing my hopes.”

Z-Murder, Mr. Hitchens, I too would have and would today continue to support your “ideal war“. But we don’t live in an ideal world, we live in this world.

If I understand Murder’s post correctly, his defense of Hitchens’ views on Iraq (and indeed, Hitchens’ own justification for such views) is based on some idealized, fictionalized state of affairs that, well, doesn’t exist. To which I say, great, when that idealized world exists, let’s have it your way. Until then, let’s deal with what we have.

Just because Hitchens’ views on Iraq are right in some ideal world does not make those views right in our world. For Hitchens, the international community should have banded together and supported Iraqi regime change. And maybe he’s right: those passivist liberal nations that refused to act were wrong. But those nations exist, and it’s no surprise to anyone those nations would oppose or refrain from almost any war. Given this predictable fact, to support Iraqi regime change was to support unilateral military intervention by the U.S. That’s the real world we live in, and that’s what the Second Iraq War has been. We can argue about the wrongness of those liberal nations that opposed Iraqi regime change, but that does not make unilateral U.S military intervention in Iraq any more right.

Murder asks “Does believing the initial decision to go to war was justified thereby make me responsible for the mismanagement of the war by the Bush administration?” as if this is a difficult question to answer. But this question poses the same ideal/reality disconnect. To me, the answer is (particularly with the benefit of hindsight) obvious: yes. To borrow from Rumsfeld, you go to war with the incompetent administration you have, not with the competent, international coalition-building administration you want. Perhaps it was impossible to tell ex ante, but if you supported a war with Iraq anytime between 2000 and 2008, you supported a war on Iraq waged by the Bush administration– the exceedingly incompetent Bush administration. I did. And I acknowledge now that that was a horrible error in judgment. So, yes, my support of the war makes me responsible for the mismanagement of the war by the Bush administration.

But not quite this much:

It could have been the Coldplay song “Yellow” that upset the patron of a Wallingford neighborhood bar. Or perhaps it was the karaoke singer who belted it out….

As soon as the man on stage started singing about the stars in his best Chris Martin impersonation, the woman reportedly said: “Oh, no, not that song. I can’t stand that song!”

Witnesses said her distaste for Coldplay quickly took a violent turn, and she leaped at the would-be crooner, shouting expletives and telling him that his singing “sucked,” while expressing the same opinion of the song, according to a Seattle police report.

She pushed the man and punched him, all in an effort to stop his singing.

Can anyone tell me what in the partially-declassified National Intelligence Estimate is so newsworthy to warrant such prominent coverage in our newspapers and news shows? Tell me, which of these so-called “key judgments” would strike any sentient adult as new or surprising?

[Al-Qa’ida] has protected or regenerated key elements of its … attack capability, including: a safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas…

[A]l-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives [in the U.S.]

[T]he United States currently is in a heightened threat environment.

[A]l-Qa’ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa’ida in Iraq.

[A]l-Qa’ida’s Homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent
political, economic, and infrastructure targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the US population. The group is proficient with conventional small arms and improvised explosive devices, and is innovative in creating new capabilities and overcoming security obstacles.

[T]he spread of radical—especially Salafi—Internet sites, increasingly
aggressive anti-US rhetoric and actions, and the growing number of radical, self-generating cells in Western countries indicate that the radical and violent segment of the West’s Muslim population is expanding, including in the United States.

The ability to detect broader and more diverse terrorist plotting in this environment will challenge current US defensive efforts and the tools we use to detect and disrupt plots.

Seriously, the NIE is nothing more than a watered-down CYA measure. So why is it newsworthy? My guess is that in the context of the Bush administration’s disingenuous representation of our ill-conceived “War on Terror”, the NIE is a rare frank assessment of reality by our government.