Spot had a terrible camera angle, but you'll still appreciate the speech.
Spot had a terrible camera angle, but you'll still appreciate the speech.
An Inver Grove Heights charter school has received harassing and threatening calls in the wake of accusations that it blurs the line between religion and state by promoting Islam, the school's director said Friday.
The city's police are investigating and will put extra patrols in the area as a precaution, Police Chief Chuck Kleckner said. He said the school's director contacted the police Friday morning.
* * *
The school came under fire last month after Star Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten questioned whether TIZA, which receives public money, promotes the Muslim faith.
As every good Communist knows, justice is a tool of the class and of the party. It is used to bolster the party and its political control over the state. Individuals may therefore be prosecuted because they presented a threat to the rule of the party, or simply because it is politically expedient to do so.
What is it, grasshopper?
Well, I was doing some Google searching about Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer for some, um, extra credit, and I found these:
http://www.jacknelsonpallmeyer.com/
http://www.jacknelsonpallmeyer.org/
That's nice, grasshopper.
But it's where they take you that's important, Spotty!
Oh?
Yeah. If you click on either one of those links, they take you to Al Franken's senate campaign web site.
You're right, grasshopper! That's a good catch. Tell Spot who did this.
That's the funny thing, Spot. If you do a WHOIS search on either one of them, the owner comes up as a dummy registrant: WhoisGuard Protected.
Maybe that's his name, grasshopper.
You think?
No, of course not.
Some day we'll have a lecture about campaign pranks. Maybe we'll even get Michael Brodkorb in as a guest speaker! Or, we could get the person who pulled this stunt. Grasshopper, why don't you ask Al Franken if it was somebody associated with his campaign?
Hey Al Franken! Did somebody associated with your campaign do this?
[walking up and sitting on the corner of her desk in the newsroom] That was a nice column on Wednesday, Katie.
[looking up, startled] Really? Oh, I mean, thank you. I liked it, too, Mr. Tice. I did some digging to get that information about that Muslim school operating right under our noses!
Well, let's not get carried away. I know that you got that tip dropped in your lap by a recent College Republican chair at Winona State:
In the fall of 2005 [Amanda Getz] was elected Chair of the Winona College Republicans and was recently appointed as Vice Chair South.
I hardly think that matters!
I suppose not. Let me ask you, though, have you ever had a source or interviewed somebody who wasn't a Republican?
I'm sure that I have.
Okay, whatever. But you see, here's the deal. You got the ACLU of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Education to look into this school for mixing religion and public dollars. The former I can sort of understand, but the latter is downright amazing.
Yeah, that was cool, wasn't it?
I suggest that you expand this into a real, well, crusade.
What do you mean?
There are lots of other charter schools that have a pretty obvious religious connection: Ascension Academy, New Visions, Higher Ground, New Spirit Primary, New Spirit Middle, the list goes on.
[looking up, shaken] But that's clearly different, Mr. Tice!
Oh, how?
Those sound like Christian schools.
I see your point. Never mind.
Update: A belated thump of the tail to Ollie Ox at A Bluestem Prairie.
In the words of those philosopher kings from Spot's youth, the Lovin' Spoonful:
Did you ever have to make up your mind,
To pick up on one and leave the other behind?
It's not often easy, and not often kind;
Did you ever have to make up your mind?
Spot stuck his cold, wet nose in the Third Congressional District campaign for the DFL endorsement, but he's been quiet about it since Spot's guy dropped out of the race.
Until now.
Spot would be really happy to be represented by either Terri Bonoff or Ashwin Madia, especially when compared to the Republican offering, Erik "you kids get off my lawn" Paulsen.
But Spot thinks he would be better represented by Terri Bonoff. Spot endorses her for the DFL, er, endorsement and for Jim Ramstad's seat in Congress.
Why?
Having talked with them each multiple times, Spot believes that Terri is deeper on a couple of policy issues that are important to Spot: transportation and education. This flows perhaps naturally from Terri's committee assignments and work in the Minnesota Senate. She speaks knowledgeably and impressively about federal - state relations in these areas, especially when it comes to funding.
There is no question in Spot's mind that Terri can do a better job of sticking up for the District.
Terri is also more committed to getting out of Iraq sooner rather than later than Ash Madia is.
As an incumbent state senator, Terri Bonoff has been at a distinct disadvantage in the short campaign since Jim Ramstad announced his retirement. That's especially true since the legislature went back into session; she simply hasn't had the time to campaign that Ash Madia has had and represent her district, too. It has undoubtedly affected the time she has had to prepare, and to practice her speech making, too.
For example, she had to cancel an appearance at Drinking Liberally last week to stay and vote on amendments to what ultimately became the budget bill.
Which bring Spot to Steve Perry's snotty piece at Minnesota Monitor this afternoon. Perry cribs extensively from the carnival barker Michael Brodkorb in saying that Terri Bonoff's speaking style will cause her to lose the endorsement.
How many times the soothsayer Perry has actually heard Terri, he doesn't say. But Perry's little hit piece on the eve of the convention and parroting the Republican apparatchik Brodkorb ought to be dismissed the way you'd scrape doggy doo off your shoe.
UPDATE: No Drinking Liberally tonight. That is all. Carry on.
Be sure to check the WCCO crawler for the latest information. (Kidding)
If the weather cooperates enough to permit DL tonight, remember that the regular time is six to nine, and the place is the 331 Club in northeast Minneapolis.
No candidate or other speaker lined up, but if you come, you may be able to see Spot and Hairy Truman execute an intricate pas de deux on their way to and from the mens' room.
Boys and girls, Spot wants you to go to The Uptake and see the convention stump speeches of Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer and Al Franken. See which one moves you.
Spot, you shot the JNP one, didn't you?
Yes, grasshopper, Spot did.
On Tuesday, Scott Horton at the blog No Comment told again the story of the Navy's Lieutenant Commander Matthew Diaz, who served his country as a staff judge advocate at Guantánamo. Diaz was confronted with a moral dilemma: obey and uphold the chain of command or obey international humanitarian law. He chose the latter and has paid a heavy price for it. Here's how Horton describes it:
Matthew Diaz served his country as a staff judge advocate at Guantánamo. He watched a shameless assault on America’s Constitution and commitment to the rule of law carried out by the Bush Administration. He watched the introduction of a system of cruel torture and abuse. He watched the shaming of the nation’s uniformed services, with their proud traditions that formed the very basis of the standards of humanitarian law, now torn asunder through the lawless acts of the Executive. Matthew Diaz found himself in a precarious position—as a uniformed officer, he was bound to follow his command. As a licensed and qualified attorney, he was bound to uphold the law. And these things were indubitably at odds.
Diaz resolved to do something about it. He knew the Supreme Court twice ruled the Guantánamo regime, which he was under orders to uphold, was unlawful. In the Hamdan decision, the Court went a step further. In powerful and extraordinary words, Justice Kennedy reminded the Administration that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was binding upon them, and that a violation could constitute a criminal act. One senior member of the Bush legal team, informed of the decision over lunch, was reported to have turned “white as a sheet” and to have immediately excused himself. For the following months, Bush Administration lawyers entered into a frenzied discussion of how to protect themselves from criminal prosecution.
Diaz talked about it. Here's what happened:
Diaz was charged, tried and convicted for disclosing “secrets.” For the Bush Administration, any information which would be politically embarrassing or harmful to it is routinely classified “secret.” In this fashion the Administration believes it can use criminal sanctions against those who disclose information it believes will be politically damaging. The list of detainees at Guantánamo, which by law was required to be disclosed, was classified as “secret.”
Diaz spent six months in prison and left it bankrupt and without a job. In addition to his sentence, the Pentagon is working aggressively to have Diaz stripped of his law license so he will not be able to practice his profession. The Bush Administration has sought to criminalize, humiliate and destroy Diaz. Its motivation could not be clearer: Diaz struck a blow for the rule of law. And nothing could be more threatening to the Bush Administration than this.
Diaz was recognized for his courage to speak out:
On Thursday in the National Press Club in Washington, a crowd gathered to witness the presentation of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling to Lieutenant Commander Matthew Diaz.
You can read Horton's entire post at the link above, boys and girls. Spot urges you to do so. You can read Horton's contrast of Matthew Diaz with the author of the "torture memo," John Yoo. Perhaps for Spot's purpose, however, the most important paragraph is the highlighted one. This is the view of everyone, really, that Spot knows, save one.
Spot had never heard of this skin-headed, jack-booted radio thug before before Avidor, Andy Birkey, and Coleen Rowley got Spot's attention.
Wow! Who is this guy, Spot?
Let's let Andy Birkey, writing at Minnesota Monitor, tell us:
The Twin Cities' newest conservative talk show host has an idea for managing the thousands of protesters coming to the Republican National Convention in St. Paul in September: machine guns.
Chris Baker, formerly a talk radio host in Houston, took over the morning spot on KTLK in early March. On Friday, he took issue with the debate among Minneapolis law enforcement personnel as to whether police should limit the use of Tasers and pepper spray on protesters in Minneapolis (link to audio file). Baker's suggestion is violent suppression of what he calls "stinky protesters" that are part of "an industry funded by billionaires and communist organizations (and) they are well-coordinated and incredibly dangerous."
Baker continued: "So we've been talking about police protection during the upcoming convention when all those stinky protesters are coming. There seems to be a big debate over whether or not police officers will be able to wear helmets, carry shields, use pepper spray and Tasers on this crowd. You know, I'll tell you what works on a crowd like this -- a machine gun, that always works very well." [italics are Spot's]
Andy continues, quoting Baker:
"You must have order, you cannot have a civilized society without order and if that means cracking a few skulls, so be it," said Baker. "A good ole boy network is what you need and hand out some ax handles."
Peace advocate and former FBI agent Coleen Rowley heard the violent rhetoric on Friday. "It doesn't take an expert on the First Amendment to recognize that suggesting the 'good ol' boy network' hand out ax handles and machine guns be used to mow a crowd down comes close to inciting violence," she wrote at the Huffington Post. "This inflammatory rhetoric looks no different than the reason we are not allowed to falsely yell 'fire' in a crowded theater."
Spot thinks because Baker spoke these words last week, and the convention isn't until late in the summer, his rant is probably protected by the First Amendment, in that it doesn't have the necessary quality of immediate incitement necessary for a criminal offense. During the convention, or in the immediate run up to it? Well, that would be a different thing.
Ironically enough, Baker is probably protected by the same thing that will allow peaceful protest during the convention, and the thing that permits Spot to say that he thinks Baker is a skin-headed, jack-booted thug!
Chris Baker has had a promising career in radio ever since he caught that break working for Radio Rwanda.
You made that up, didn't you, Spot?
Yes, grasshopper.
Alternate title: John Yoo - the gift that keeps on giving
Spot and many other commentators have discussed John Yoo's torture memo. The memo contains in footnote ten a reference to another memo authored by John Yoo - and Robert Delahunty - about the application of the Fourth Amendment to "domestic military operations":
[The entire Yoo memo is linked in the link above.]
Here's what the Associated Press said about the footnote and the memorandum referred to in it:
WASHINGTON — For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, the Bush administration believed that the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures on U.S. soil didn't apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.
That view was expressed in a secret Justice Department legal memo dated Oct. 23, 2001. The administration on Wednesday stressed that it now disavows that view.
The October 2001 memo was written at the request of the White House by John Yoo, then the deputy assistant attorney general, and addressed to Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel at the time. The administration had asked the department for an opinion on the legality of potential responses to terrorist activity.
The 37-page memo is classified and has not been released. Its existence was disclosed Tuesday in a footnote of a separate secret memo, dated March 14, 2003, released by the Pentagon in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.
This earlier memorandum apparently gave the go ahead for the NSA's warrantless wiretap program:
Exactly what domestic military action was covered by the October memo is unclear. But federal documents indicate that the memo relates to the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program, or TSP.
That program intercepted phone calls and e-mails on U.S. soil, bypassing the normal legal requirement that such eavesdropping be authorized by a secret federal court. The program began after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and continued until Jan. 17, 2007, when the White House resumed seeking surveillance warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
John Yoo is a one man constitutional wrecking ball.
On Sunday - naturally - Katie came out against sex education. Katie is in favor of the "keep your pants on, Missy" approach to the problem:
Minnesota's soaring rate of sexually transmitted disease [STD] is in the news again. At the national level, a recent study found that 25 percent of 14- to 19-year-old girls have at least one of four common STDs.
The solution? Enlightened folks tell us it's more sex education, counseling and treatment. They call for more tax-funded initiatives such as a $1.3 million bill for screening and public education recently considered by the Minnesota Legislature.
But few are talking about the real reason for the epidemic: too many kids are having sex at too young an age.
And Katie has the statistics to back it up:
This idea [that kids are, in Katie's words, "going to do it"] is one of the biggest cons of our generation. At least one group understands this -- the 53 percent of high school students who reported that they had never had sexual intercourse in a 2005 survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Empowering? Give me a break
The con about youth sex is rooted in the myth behind the sexual revolution: that sex without restraints -- doing what you feel -- is both liberating and fundamental to human happiness. But in our sex-saturated culture, the opposite is true for many young people. It's far from liberating to be at the mercy of frenzied adolescent impulses.
"High school" encompasses about the ages of fourteen to eighteen. Without looking at the data, Spot is quite confident in saying that the curve of the sexually-experienced increases when plotted against the age of the student.
Well, duh, Spotty. The likelihood that somebody has had sex increases as they get older? Thanks for the insight.
Don't be impertinent, grasshopper. Spot is just saying to consider the true meaning of the statistic that Katie quotes. For example if no one under seventeen in high school had sex, it would mean that everyone over that age had sex. And one has to wonder what percentage of those in the haven't column would be in the those who have column, given the opportunity.
But Spot, doesn't advocating abstinence and keeping kids in the dark about it discourage sexual activity?
A survey of more than 2,000 teenagers carried out by a research company on behalf of Congress found that the half of the sample given abstinence-only education displayed exactly the same predilection for sex as those who had received conventional sex education in which contraception was discussed.
So then, boys and girls, here's the difference between Katie and Spot: Katie is apparently okay with the extra unplanned pregnancies, extra abortions, loss of fertility and maybe the loss of life that results from ignorance; she may even think it is just punishment for the offenders. Spot does not. Not for his pups; not for the neighbors' pups; not even for Katie's pups.
WANTED
John Yoo
A/K/A Professor Organ Failure. Known to associates as "Vlad." Yoo is wanted (or will be) by international criminal authorities for the commission of war crimes.
Gosh, Spotty, that was dramatic. Do you really think he is?
It doesn't matter what Spot thinks; there are some pretty good commentators out there that think he is. Professor Organ Failure is the principal author of the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel's memorandum (Part One and Part Two), released last week, holding the view that harsh interrogation of detainees in the warron terra did not violate US law or the Geneva Convention.
Among other reasons, Professor Organ Failure said that such trifles as US law and the Geneva Convention did not apply to the president because:
It is also a canon of construction that laws of general applicability are not read to apply to the sovereign. In United States v. Nardone, 302 U.S. 379 (1937), the Supreme Court explained its application: (1) where it ''would deprive the sovereign of a recognized or established prerogative title or interest," id. at 383; or (2) "where a reading which would include such officers would work obvious absurdity[,]" id. at 384. As the Court explained, "[a] classical instance" of the deprivation of a recognized or established prerogative title or interest "is the exemption of the state from the operation of general statutes of limitation." Id. at 383.
Here, the application of these statutes to the conduct of interrogations of unlawful combatants would deprive the sovereign of a recognized prerogative. Historically, nations have been free to treat unlawful combatants as they wish, and in the United States this power has been vested in the President through the Commander-in-Chief Clause.
This is on page 15 of the memorandum. POF is full of canons of construction, and in the end reminds Spot of the song he used to hear on the Morning Show on MPR: "I Am My Own Grandpa." As others have pointed out, Yoo was obviously trying to justify a position, not give legal advice. Yoo is a dangerous proponent of the "unitary executive," a notion that the president can do anything in the name of national security.
Glenn Greenwald has a very good summary of the Yoo memo at John Yoo's war crimes posted at Salon. Here's a nugget that Glenn picked out Yoo's feat of legerdemain:
If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner that might arguably violate a criminal prohibition, he would be doing so in order to prevent further attacks on the United States by the al Qaeda terrorist network. In that case, we believe that he could argue that the executive branch's constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack justified his actions.
Oh, Spotty! There must be some limit on what the president, or someone acting on his behalf, can do?
Well, if there is, Professor Organ Failure hasn't seen it yet:
Dahlia's [Lithwick, another writer at Slate] aptly summarizes this just-released memo's constitutional conclusion: "if the president authorizes it, it isn't illegal."
Law professor Jack Balkin summarized why Yoo probably won't be taking any foreign vacations in the future:
Those responsible for the interrogation of Detainee 063 face a real risk of investigation if they set foot outside the United States. Article 4 of the torture convention criminalizes “complicity” or “participation” in torture, and the same principle governs violations of Common Article 3.
There are a number of countries, including several in Europe, that assert the principle of "universal jurisdiction" to try war criminals.
This is among the sorriest chapters in American legal history. It would be entirely fitting if John Yoo had to stand in the dock somewhere and try to justify what he has wrought.
Just a little Saturday night bed-time reading, boys and girls. Spot hasn't digested it yet. It's the Senate Foreign Relations testimony of Nir Rosen.
A thump of the tail to A Tiny Revolution.
Oh, why is that, grasshopper?
Well, here's a quote from Il Duce, also known as Tracy Eberly, in a comment about your post The Devil Made Me Do It!:
It is sad that you have to blame your poor writing on a dog.
That had to hurt, Spotty!
Yes, grasshopper, it was like a kick to the stomach - or perhaps even lower - it shook Spot's self-esteem like no criticism he has ever received before. With that one sentence, Tracy delivered a blow that made Spot question his very existence, his raison d'ĂŞtre.
But Spotty is resolved to soldier on in the face the humiliation!
You are so brave, Spotty!
Yes, he is, isn't he grasshopper?
DFL candidate for the endorsement for the Third Congressional District in Minnesota, Terri Bonoff, will be at Drinking Liberally tomorrow evening (Thursday, April 3rd). Drinking Liberally meets at the 331 Club in Minneapolis; our regular meeting time is six to nine.
Candidate Bonoff will arrive around seven, offer a few remarks and take some questions from the assembled DL denizens.
There has been a little, er, discussion over at Centrisity about Michael Brodkorb's "disclosure" page. Flash, and Spot, too, think it's too cute by half. It starts out this way:
I have spent most of my entire professional career working in Minnesota politics and public relations.
(You can get a link to Brodkorb's page at the Centrisity post, if you are so inclined.)
Spot says put in a call to the syntax homicide detectives. (Young man asks old man: Have you lived here your whole life? Old man replies: Not yet.)
Where was Spot? Oh, yes. Mikey goes on to identify all the party and campaign jobs that he has had, and how he is a "Republican operative," but then he says that if he is "hired" by the Republican party or a candidate, he will disclose that, because the failure to do so would "tarnish the effectiveness" of Mikey's blog. As the Brits might say, Really?
Spotty, what does "hired" mean?
It means to become an employee, grasshopper. Mikey calls himself "self-employed," which means he takes money as an independent contractor. From all manner of sugar daddies who aren't the Republican Party itself or a Republican candidate. It is incomprehensible, really, that Mikey isn't some kind of kept man.
Boys and girls, your Aunt Tild was thinking of what it would be like if Mikey was really as independent as he wants you to believe. She put together some pictures, which Spot has collected for your viewing pleasure.
You can just hit the full screen button for a larger version, boys and girls.
Spot sent a link to his video Al, Debate Jack! to the Al Franken campaign, asking for comment. None thus far. For those of you who may have missed, here is the video again: