June 2007 Archives

Saudi Interior Minister Prince Nayef bin Abd Al-Aziz on TV a few days ago:

"Brother, are you aware that your sons who go to Iraq are used only for bombings? They are the ones who carry out the bombings. It is not just me who says this, but also the Iraqi officials, including the Iraqi interior ministers that I have met.

...The Saudis are brought [to Iraq] in order to carry out bombings. ... Who are the ones who die? Are they senior officials? Are they soldiers in any army? No. The ones who die are innocent men, women, and children. Would you be pleased if your sons became tools of murder? This is the reality. Moreover, those who escape being killed come back here with deviant ideas, and they try to implement them in our society. Hence, security activity is insufficient if it is not accompanied by ideological activity. This is a virus in the body of this nation, and if we do not kill this virus, if we do not reach, diagnose, and kill it – it will remain. The men of the security agencies amputate a decaying organ in this body, but who should fight this deviant ideology, if not clerics and sheiks like you? I refer especially to the preachers and imams of the mosques."

And who would be president of a newly joined continent? Why, fearless -- er, feckless -- leader Moammar Gadhafi, of course, who has said Africa must "unite or die."

Still crazy after all these years...

Well, Bridget, I would say you and I really don't disagree. It was the Germans' obstructing the filming of "Valkyrie" that I objected to. But now, it seems, they've given that up. Which is to say, they're no longer using the powers of the state to discriminate against someone (Tom Cruise) on the basis of his religion. They just think Cruise and Scientology are creepy. No argument there.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s call to revoke King-Harbor Hospital’s license is nothing but crass political granstanding. Arnie didn't lift a finger to help King when he had the chance now he wants to jump on the popular, but silly, and misguided Dump King bandwagon. His grandstanding is even more ludicrous in light of the fact that the hospital management has taken major steps to correct the deficiencies in the care and treatment of patients many of which have not been publicized or acknowledged. The U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services also gave King-Harbor a passing grade on the actions it’s taken to date and have not cut-off funding.

Schwarzenegger has offered no viable alternative for the thousands of poor, underserved residents of South L.A. that rely on King for medical needs. Schwarzenegger should back off from his call to revoke King’s license and support the ongoing efforts of King’s management and staff to further improve services. After all, Arnie, don't you have more important things to worry about, like running a state!

Off biking through the beautiful Bay Area, then on to Napa and the Anderson Valley. Going to practice our Boontling. As we spin along on our tandem bike, under blue skies and with gentle breezes, under soaring gulls and improbably stately snowy egrets (Egrets, I’ve had a few, but then again, too few to mention), my wife, the Fair Helenkela, murmurs, “Why do terrorists issue warnings on the net before trying to trigger explosions?” Kind of breaks the mood, but it is a fair question. It has a good answer, though not “good” in the moral sense.

Terrorists, aside from being cruel, violent and sociopathetic, are also terrible liars. They know that other terrorists are also terrible liars. There is no honor not only among thieves but also among terrorists. They do know, however, that their fellow terrorists would take credit (a perverse concept itself for the destruction of innocent lives) and rob them of their hard-earned achievements in destruction.

If I issue a threat to do a specific act, it is not so that society can be on alert or defuse the bomb. It is simply that by predicting the event, I can attach the name of my outfit to the carnage without fear of some other sociopaths grabbing the billing. It’s all about credits.

I don’t want to think about terrorists while getting away from it all. But there really is no getting away. As Joe Louis said, “You can run but you can’t hide.” But I’m going to try anyway.

We know that some time, some day we will get hit again. We just don’t know when, where or how hard. We also don’t know how this will make us feel or what we will want to do. All the pundits in the world cannot accurately predict whether when hit we will do what Spain did and retreat, withdraw and all but apologize or if we will more resemble England and keep going about our business.

Will we run towards the anti-war movement believing that neither Iraq nor homeland security has made us safer or will be go into full battle mode and look for some place to bomb?

I don’t know the answer. I do know that the chatter level is high and the 4th of July is an attractive and iconic moment. We will not be biking across the Golden Gate on Wednesday.

... or at least sympathize with the German position on the Scientologist playing anti-Nazi hero Colonel Claus Schenk von Stauffenberg. The German defense ministry now says it has no qualms about allowing shooting of the film "Valkyrie" at German military sites. The International Herald Tribune has some feedback from Germans, including Josef Joffe, a German journalist: "Stauffenberg for Germans is like Jefferson and Lincoln, motherhood and apple pie all rolled into one. Germany is a country of established churches, and so Scientology is viewed as a cult and, worse, totalitarian and exploitative. A professing Scientologist in the role of Stauffenberg is like casting Judas as Jesus. It is secular blasphemy."

And, probably of more profound influence, Berthold Graf von Stauffenberg, the eldest son of Count von Stauffenberg: "Scientology is a totalitarian ideology. The fact that an avowed Scientologist like Cruise is supposed to play the victim of a totalitarian regime is purely sick."

Furthermore, I understand the Germans' sensitivity to cults. Why, they believe, replace one sordid history of fascism and mind-control by opening the door to more fascism and mind-control? It's for this reason that until recently they banned (along with several other EU nations) Sun Myung Moon from coming into the country to brainwash youths. Whereas the West goes with the PC term "new religious movements" for some of these groups that preach some sort of eventual world takeover or goal of ideological uniformity, the Germans, because of history, look at the cults in a whole different light. From a thought-provoking piece on the anti-cult movement in Germany:

"They are far too reactive; they see all new religions as bad; but, there is good reason, in Germany, for seeing some new religions as bad. This needs to be remembered, and taken into account, when we try to assess what is happening in Germany. Anyone who wants to persuade the Germans that they ought to treat Scientology, the Unification Church, or any other group better than they do, has got to remember the past. In pleading for tolerance, it is important to make very clear that the groups for which one is pleading are not genuine enemies of the constitution, who are trying to destroy the constitution, because these people do exist."

... and it might as well be me.

I'm amazed at the lack of a public outcry over the German government's efforts to stop the making of "Valkyrie" -- a film about the life of Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, who tried to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Berlin's objection is that Stauffenberg, a German hero, would be played by Tom Cruise -- who is a Scientologist. And the Germans don't like Scientologists.

Now l make no apologies for the cruel joke that is L. Ron Hubbard's ridiculous sect. And I could understand why Deutschland would forbid shooting the film on government property if it were a promotional video for "Dianetics." But there is no church-state separation issue here. "Valkyrie" isn't about Scientology, it just so happens to star a Scientologist. Instead, this is a matter of religious freedom, with the German government discriminating against Cruise -- and everyone working with him on this project -- because of his religion.

Somehow, all this gets a pass from the chattering classes, probably because Scientology does little to elicit much sympathy. But imagine the hue and cry if, say, the Bush Administration tried to block the making of a film because its star were a Muslim, or even an atheist.

For a country with a vile history of mistreating religious minorities, you would think Germany would try a lot harder to respect religious freedom now. Or that the world would be more quick to condemn its intolerance.

If you were worried about the absence of FF blogger Earl Ofari Hutchinson, fear not. Earl just wrote in:

got so bogged down with King and Hilton that my blogging slipped as Arnie says I'll be back!

And that's good news. FYI, Jonathan Dobrer and Mariel Garza, both getting some well-deserved rest, will also return shortly!

We're sorry to report that Farfour, Hamas TV's answer to Mickey Mouse, has martyred his mouse self, thus moving on to meet up with 72 furry virgin rodents in the hereafter. From AP:

"A Mickey Mouse lookalike who preached Islamic domination on a Hamas-affiliated children's television program was beaten to death in the show's final episode Friday.

In the final skit, 'Farfour' was killed by an actor posing as an Israeli official trying to buy Farfour's land. At one point, the mouse called the Israeli a 'terrorist.'

'Farfour was martyred while defending his land,' said Sara, the teen presenter. He was killed 'by the killers of children,' she added."

MEMRI documented a previous, less fatal Farfour show, where the Mickey ripoff advocated the caliphate while his human counterparts blabbered " We will annihilate the Jews."

This would be insanely funny if it wasn't so sad that Palestinian kids' heads were being filled with this crap on a daily basis.

Haaretz, by the way, had a good piece last month on "Hamas' latest conquest: The Walt Disney Co."

Our friends at one of our NorCal sister papers, the San Jose Mercury News, are floating an idea so hideous we can only hope it fails to migrate down this way. The idea is "Drive the Speed Limit Day," which should be pretty self-explanatory.

Drive the speed limit? Drive the freaking speed limit?!? I wish I could drive the speed limit! As it is, I'll be lucky if I can go 30 mph on the 101 Freeway tonight, fighting holiday-weekend traffic.

Rest assured, on the rare chance I am able to (safely) exceed the legal limit, I won't be listening to the good folks at the Merc, but to the legendary Sammy Hagar:

When I drive that slow, you know it's hard to steer.
And I can't get my car out of second gear.
What used to take two hours now takes all day.
Huh - It took me 16 hours to get to L.A.!

Go on & write me up for 125
Post my face, wanted dead or alive
Take my license n' all that jive
I can't drive 55!

... had no idea that it was physically as well as monetarily. This from the Houston Chronicle --

Four women who worked for Houston-based Halliburton Co.'s former subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root have filed federal lawsuits against the companies, claiming they endured sexual harassment and, in two cases rape, while working in Iraq. Attorneys say their clients encountered a sexually-charged atmosphere where women were repeatedly demeaned and solicited for sex despite reporting harassment to supervisors. The lawyers for women in the alleged rape cases say they are turning to the civil courts in part because they haven't been able to determine whether federal authorities are pursuing criminal prosecutions. KBR would not comment specifically on the cases, but a spokeswoman said sexual harassment is barred. Before being deployed to Iraq, all KBR employees are briefed on the company's code of business conduct, which "strictly prohibits sexual harassment by KBR employees," said KBR spokeswoman Heather Browne.

P.S.
It's good to know that KBR has a policy against sexual harassment, now if we could get them to work on that rape thing.

... any regime that sits atop an ocean of oil, yet still needs to ration gas to its rioting citizens, should have no trouble crumbling all by itself.

So while our mayor is out saving the world, the mayor of Philadelphia is up to something somewhat more pedestrian: He's waiting in line to buy an iPhone. And his constituents are taking advantage of the opportunity to give him an earful -- chewing him out for standing in line on a workday, rather than doing the city's business. The mayor, however, swears that, thanks to modern technology like the iPhone, he can do his work just as well on a street corner as he can in City Hall. (Great! Let's shut down City Hall!)

Oh, how fun it would be to see Antonio face his constituents in a similar manner. Of course, that would never happen here in L.A., where city pols have staffers to go wait in line (or babysit, right Rocky?) for them.

Come on, Philly, you call that a mayor?

Patrick's take on the death of immigration reform reminds me of this classic:

"Their boots make a cracking sound when they walk. Why don't we call them crackers?"

Over in the Wall Street Journal, Jennifer Graham has a theory as to why Nancy Drew -- aged 16 to 18 in the original novels -- was made to be just 13 in the new movie: So she wouldn't have to be a skank. Writes Graham:

When Edward Stratemeyer invented the character in the 1930s, Nancy Drew followed the formula of the other books in his fiction factory: no touching, kissing or violence, according to Marvin Heiferman, co-author of "The Mysterious Case of Nancy Drew & The Hardy Boys," which chronicles the series' success. But when was the last time you saw a chaste 18-year-old in any Hollywood production? Quick, Nancy: Look 13.

In the books, Ned Nickerson, Nancy's "special friend," is a hunky college football player. Theirs is a chaste relationship; they dance sometimes and take strolls in the moonlight, but rarely do they even kiss. In the movie, there is no mention of college, and boyish Ned is little more than a sycophantic satellite for Nancy. They share one kiss, and it's fleeting and sweet, in one of Mr. Fleming's few nods to the original. But for a movie heroine to be sexually innocent these days, she can't have graduated from ninth grade yet.

What's more, Graham notes, whereas in the novels, Drew was celebrated within her community for being virtuous and smart, in the movie -- set in today's L.A. -- her exceptional ways make her an outcast:

At Hollywood High, with all her virtues, Miss Drew is a dweeb; this is a fundamental change in the character, even more so than her shifted age. Though she triumphs over the multiply pierced mean girls by the end of the film (Hey, I can perform an emergency tracheotomy with a pen, can you?), the young impressionable sorts to whom the film is marketed get this message: If you are a child of virtue, you will never fit in.

A sad message, although probably a realistic one that teens would do well to ponder: In today's youth culture, it's hard, if not impossible, to be both good and cool. So choose wisely. Would that our teens produce a lot more Nancy Drews, and far fewer Britney Spears.

The smoking-gun, slam-dunk evidence of Phil Spector's guilt came forth in in his trial yesterday, and, surprisingly, it was offered by the defense. I refer, of course, to the pathetic testimony of "expert" defense witness Dr. Vincent DiMaio, who delivered this exceedingly lame argument:

Look at Mr. Spector," DiMaio said at one point, drawing jurors' attention across the courtroom to the frail, diminutive defendant. "He has Parkinson's features. He trembles."...

"She was 25 years younger, 7 to 9 inches taller," DiMaio said. "She outweighed him by 25 pounds and was in better health than he was. ... Her reflexes would have been greater. Her strength greater."

Um, yes, doc, she was taller, younger, stronger. But he had a gun. I don't care if Lana Clarkson was built like Arnold, if Phil could pull a trigger, she would be no match.

If this is the best the defense can offer, it might as well throw in the towel now. The "Lana was stronger than Phil" line of reasoning is about as persuasive as this crazy picture above, which I found here.

Another advocate for local government from Friday's Daily News' letters ...

Mayor AWOL
Re "Mayor lobbying for immigration" (Briefly, June 27):

I understand that our stealth mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, and his entourage were in Washington, D.C., again — this time to support the Senate immigration bill. Isn't the L.A. mayor supposed to stay at home and take care of local matters?
I recall when Antonio was spending a lot of time in Florida working with the Kerry campaign while he was being paid to be a full-time L.A. councilman. I hope all of this is remembered when he is looking for votes again.

Gordon Brown just took over from Tony Blair as British prime minister, and just got his first shot across the bow with an attempted car bombing in Piccadilly Circus (above). From what they're saying on Sky News right now, the driver of the Mercedes that carried an explosive device crashed into a Dumpster just as nightclubs in the neighborhood were about to let out for the evening, then jumped out and ran away. They also noted that the anniversary of the 7/7 tube/bus bombings is swiftly approaching, and that this weekend is the big Concert for Diana. Scotland Yard won't comment on reports (which apparently are circulating widely, as I got such reports in my e-mail before I even knew about the story) that in addition to the confirmed gas cannisters in the vehicle, it was also packed with nails for maximum impact.

Of note to me is how the terrorists stepped up to the Mercedes. It attracts less attention from residents who probably expect terrorists to blow up a Dodge Neon, and shows greater cash access than some wayward wannabe terrorist kid crying in his malt vinegar while working at the fish-and-chips stand. Plus, it pretty much rules out the IRA -- no self-respecting Irishman would blow that much money on a demolition vehicle when he could spend it on suds.

I'm a big fan of scary films, and "1408" tends to evoke one of the best ones, "The Shining" (both being Stephen King stories). Besides offering lots of good, genuine frights, this film proves two very important points:

a) Carpenters music IS the root of all evil. I knew it!

b) Samuel L. Jackson can still drop a silky, lyrical F-bomb like no one else.

(That's star John Cusack, by the way, listening to James Blunt's "You're Beautiful"...)

So the James Blunt song that my last boyfriend had christened as the top radio tune that made him think of me has just been named the "Most Irritating Song Ever."

There are no words...

In her Larry King interview, Paris Hilton complained that her jail strip search "was ... the most humiliating experience of my life. I never had to do that in front of somebody you don't even know. It's pretty embarrassing."

Surely it is, Paris. But more embarrassing than starring in a widely released, widely viewed sex tape?

"It's pretty gross taking your clothes off in front of someone," Hilton told King, evidencing a new-found sense of modesty. Well, better late than never.

In his thoughtful reflection on the Supreme Court's affirmative-action ruling, Jonathan raises the prospect of people trying to fake membership in this or that race in order to achieve certain benefits. Jonathan writes:

If you think that I am being unrealistic and people won’t petition to change race to get benefits, you haven’t been paying attention to highly motivated parents who are getting their kids diagnoses of attention deficit disorder in order to get them more time on tests.

True enough. Also witness those who suddenly decided they were "Native Americans" after tribes were allowed to open casinos. Or, personally, I have a friend who has one white parent and one Asian one. When he applied to college, he carefully kept the Asian parent a secret -- and marked "white" on all the forms -- knowing that Asians, generally, are discriminated against in admissions, for fear that there are "too many" of them in higher education.

Is this healthy? Getting people to obsess over ethnicity, to deny their own family members and heritage? I'm with Jonathan, I don't want a government that looks at me as a member of a race, rather than as an individual.

Whatever happened to the content of our character?

Former spy + judo champ = bad boy for wonkettes! But the polonium 210 thing was a definite turnoff -- I mean, you couldn't even feel comfortable drinking a Diet Coke next to the guy...

P.S. Viktor Yushchenko was hot -- especially with that orange scarf -- until he got poisoned.

I marched for integration, picketed for fair housing and contributed time and money to the Congress of Racial Equality. I may shock you in writing that I think the Supreme Court got it right today in ruling that the use of race to determine admissions or placement in public education is the wrong way to advance the agreed upon social benefits of integration. I believe that Justice must be blind and the scales should not be tipped by considerations of race. When the blindfold slips, history indicates that Justice is diminished.

I grew up in a liberal household and was taught that racial discrimination was wrong. I grew up being taught that the use of race or religion (we didn’t know the word “ethnic” back then) in public accommodations, school admissions or employment was both wrong and dangerous.

I saw the films of the bodies being bulldozed in the Nazi death camps following WWII and knew that most were Jews and had been murdered because they were Jews. I was taught that Jim Crow was a symbol of great and continuing evil and that Negroes (this is way before Black and Afro-American came into use) were oppressed and had every bit the talent, intellect and potential as any other group.

My very first act of civil disobedience occurred in junior high school when I applied for a summer job and the form asked for a picture. I knew that pictures were used to discern the race of an applicant and so I refused. I have continued to refuse to check the box, now apparently legal, asking my race. I always check “other” and write “human.”

The question of race was always used to keep minorities and the less powerful out. Quotas made sure that even liberal institutions didn’t get too “dark” or Jewish. Back then, the establishment didn’t worry about Asians or Hispanics. Today, they do. They worry about universities being too Asian and not Hispanic enough. Tragically, there is still the problem that our major institutions of learning and industry fail in outreach to African Americans.

As a matter of fairness it seems instinctively right to try to make good, to remediate our all too real sins of commission against people of color. But there are two very major problems with our good intentions. One has to do with the logic of learning.

I wish Bridget would find better heartthrobs. Benjamin Netanyahu is just another failed politician. No land for peace he says during elections, then he gives Hebron to Arafat. No negotiating with terrorists he howls and negotiates with Arafat in the Wye River Accords. Terrorists are scum he says and goes to the Israeli celebration of the 60th anniversary of the King David Hotel terrorist bombing by the Irgun (organized by former Prime Minister Menachem Begin).

Nope, Bridget can do a lot better than Bibi.

Well, never mind that Congress is too inept to craft a passable immigration-reform bill, even though the need for some kind of reform couldn't be more clear. Neither that august body's ineptitude nor its dismal public-approval ratings -- 14 percent, according to Pew -- was enough to dissuade our pols from taking a pay raise. In its typical backwards way of doing things, the House voted yesterday against not giving itself a raise -- that is, it voted for a pay hike -- $4,400 per pol, bumping up salaries to about $170k a year.

Only politicians could think: "Hmmm, we do nothing, and our constituents hate us. Clearly we deserve more money!"

Ah, remember when Democrats were promising that things would be different when they took over, that we'd get a more honest, less self-serving government?

Remember the immortal words of The Who: "Meet the new boss -- same as the old boss."

I may be a little behind the times, but thanks to the Daily Show I just discovered Conservapedia , the right-wing fundamentalist Christian version of Wikipedia, started by homeschool students in 2006 to counter the rampant "liberal bias" (what most of the world calls "common knowledge") of the popular online encylopedia. In fact, Conservapedia's own study found that Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public. Six, people! That's, like, a lot.

Conservapedia is filed with information with Christian values and fun facts such as:
"Anal sex can be an important risk factor for intestinal parasitism." Who knew?

The page operates with this mission: Principals first, facts later.

We have certain principles that we adhere to, and we are up-front about them. Beyond that we welcome the facts

Senaturd: (noun) An elected U.S. representative characterized by political craveness; a person whose actions helped stall immigration reform for another year, a politican whose fear of pissing off one group of angry constituents acheived the result of takign an action that pleases absolutely no one.

Another year, another failed attempt at immigration reform.

A reluctant warrior from Thursday's letters to the editor.

Conserving water?

Re "Dealing with drought, sizzling summer" (June 7):

We have been asked to start being more conservative in our water usage. I think that any effort to further reduce the water used by my family will be put on the back burner until there is some sort of a moratorium on building in this city. We are asked to conserve, but it seems that those efforts are only to feed into the new apartments and condominiums that are springing up in every square inch of open space left in this city.

What good is conservation when the influx of new people will only further burden our diminishing water supply? I will not further reduce my water usage in order to squeeze more people into our already overburdened landscape.

I have just a few words for Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, pictured left: Head On -- apply directly to the forehead!

Hugo, by the way, is in Russia to go submarine shopping. And he's just been analyzed as a malignant narcissist with a messianic complex. Big surprise there!

(In the case of his chin fur, literally.) From the Moscow Times:

"A man formerly held in the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was killed Wednesday in a shootout with security agents in Kabardino-Balkariya, the Federal Security Service said.

...The statement said (Ruslan) Odizhev was a suspect in the 1999 apartment bombings in Moscow and Volgodonsk and that he took part in a 2005 attack on police and government facilities in Nalchik, the capital of Kabardino-Balkariya. That attack left 139 people dead, including 94 militants.

The FSB said Odizhev was the 'spiritual leader' of Yarmuk, an Islamic extremist organization connected to an array of violence in the region.

The regional prosecutor's office said Odizhev was killed in Nalchik and that three homemade explosive devices were found on his body. ...Odizhev was one of seven Russians released from Guantanamo Bay in 2004."

Late Tuesday, before my column on Daniel Pearl went to press, I double-checked the Reporters Without Borders Web site, confirming the statistic of 47 reporters killed thus far this year. Peeking at the site a few moments ago, I saw the number had gone up to 50.

Hey, I didn't say it was about something serious or anything like that...

Goof on Dick Cheney as you will, but Wonkette observed a few years back that Lynne Cheney appears to be a pretty lucky woman...

And I wouldn't call Bibi Netanyahu a "strongman"; I'd call him a "realist". Now that's hot!

A NY TImes/CBS poll found that young Americans between 17 and 29 are much more likely to lean left and are crazy optimists. Gives an old Gen X liberal-lite slacker like myself hope for the future.

Young Americans are more likely than the general public to favor a government-run universal health care insurance system, an open-door policy on immigration and the legalization of gay marriage, according to a New York Times/CBS News/MTV poll. The poll also found that they are more likely to say the war in Iraq is heading to a successful conclusion.

Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee writes about how California's GOP Congressional delegation has developed a sudden penchant for redistricting -- despite opposing it just a few years ago. Gee, what could have changed their minds? Walter explains:

They know that Democrats would still control the Legislature and that it's likely that a Democrat would be elected governor in 2010, thus giving their partisan rivals almost total power over their political careers. Democrats could grab five or six GOP seats, and they might be inclined to do so if they believe they need those seats to maintain House control in the 2012 elections.

Such base political considerations, by the way, are also why the state's Democratic Congressional delegation now opposes redistricting. Neither side gives a fig for fair elections; they just prefer whichever system will help them out, fair or not.

This whole saga reminds me of the disingenuous debate over filibustering we saw in the Senate a few years ago, where (then-majority) Republicans acted like the filibuster was an assault on democracy, and (then-minority) Democrats pretended as though it were a sacred practice. Anyone doubt that the parties have flipped positions on that matter since then?

And they'll surely flip, spin, and fudge on redistricting countless times again -- all the more reason why they shouldn't be trusted with the process in the first place.

Bridget might be crushing on the Israeli strongman, but my heart belongs to the Orginal Dick -- the smokin' hot Vice president Cheney who doesn't let anyone push him around. He certainly doesn't let any executive oversignt weenies tell him what's what. Cross him and you better leave town. Look at that scowl! Does he want to kiss me or shoot me in the face?

And don't even get me started on Papichulo Gonzo. Nothing says sexy like a little torture in the afternoon.

Northwest Valley Councilman Greig Smith today has introduced a motion calling for an audit of the city fleet of vehicles and a comprehensive review of City policy on fleet vehicle use _ which would include all those of his council colleagues and their staffs

Hmmm, it will be interesting to see if the L.A. City Council is willing to have anyone examine this particularly precious perk -- free car or SUV, free gas, free maintenence. Not a bad deal.

Just an reminder that it was a city-owned car that got City Attorney Rockey Delgadillo in so much hot water

Although it generated much less controversy this year than in years past -- perhaps because everyone is so fixated on immigration reform in Washington instead -- State Sen. Gil Cedillo once again proposed his yearly bill to give driver's license to illegal immigrants. But the the bill was quietly killed earlier this week. That legislation has died more times than Freddy Krueger.

Give One Bill Gil credit: The man is persistent.

Now we can only hope Washington will come up with a coherent plan to identify the millions of invisible people in our midst, because Sacramento surely won't.

This one comes by way of Dan Shaughnessy at the Boston Globe: What are the four colleges/universities that have produced both a U.S. president and at least one Super Bowl-winning quarterback?

Highlight the invisible text below to see the answer:
U. Michigan (Gerald Ford, Tom Brady); Stanford (Herbert Hoover, Jim Plunkett and John Elway); U.S. Naval Academy (Jimmy Carter, Roger Staubach), and Miami of Ohio (Benjamin Harrison, Ben Roethlisberger).

Remember the Subservient Chicken, that absolutely pointless yet time-sucking site in which sone dude dressed as a chicken would sumit to your every command? Well, for more politicially minded fools, uh, I mean folks, there's a new version, Subservient President.

He doesn't do much, but I think that was the point. You can get him to pick his nose, though.

I should add that the applause for the film at the CAIR screening was very lackluster; it seemed like it did not go over well. The CAIR rep on the panel also decried the film for showing that "torture's OK... it's never OK." The Pakistani captain in the film, clearly portrayed as a good guy, strings a guy up from the ceiling to find out who kidnapped Daniel Pearl. The movie pretty much makes clear that this is the only way the captain would have gotten the information out of the guy -- particularly as they were racing against the clock to try to get Pearl back alive. (Paramount PR later told me that, in real life, the captain became godfather to Pearl's son.)

In today's Daily News, Bridget gives her blessing to the new Daniel Pearl movie, "A Mighty Heart." Now, Bridget is, to put it mildly, no apologist for Islamist terror. So when she writes, "The film, although the product of less-than-conservative Hollywood talent, admirably resists descending into an anti-American screed," I assume she's right that it's reasonably fair in its treatment of sensitive issues.

So I was surprised to come across this oped from Youssef M. Ibrahim, denouncing AMH for giving "a free pass to terror." Key quotes:

My strongest reservation in "A Mighty Heart" is the absurd political correctness that permeates the film; its writers, producers, and directors do not even mention fanatical Islam to avoid offering offense....

If I were a Muslim who had just watched "A Mighty Heart" in a theater in Dearborn, Mich., Karachi, or Cairo, the only impressions that I would probably be left with is that the man got what he deserved and that Karachi is really one hell of a messy place. Beyond that, I would not have a clue that my Muslim compatriots had anything to do with it.

I haven't seen the movie, so I have no opinion on the matter, but I'm curious to see how this plays out. Perhaps Ibrahim's outrage squares with Bridget's observation that "both sides of the political aisle can find snippets of the script to make or break their preconceived assertions about war, terrorism and Islamic extremism."

In response to my column today on the Daniel Pearl murder:

"You ought to write more bluntly."

Then he says I should have seen Ann Coulter's "extremely detailed review (of "A Mighty Heart")... which was long enough to delve into some of the more sleazy themes." Natch! Well, truth be told I don't read Coulter and have no desire to be another Coulter. I don't believe in writing something inflammatory just to anger your ideological opponents; but I've never been accused of not being blunt enough!

I know there's been a lot of picking at the movie over its portrayal of the Pearl murder, and for frankly not being as graphic and bloody as the actual murder was. For good or bad, the movie has a sharp focus on the people looking for Pearl, and we share the fear of the unknown that they all felt about not knowing what was happening to Pearl from hour to hour. To me, that seems the clear reason for not showing more, though they did have the option of replicating more of the beheading video at the end. Yet a good point I saw last night from a conservative writer: The movie was dedicated to Pearl's young son, and he'll be seeing it someday. Plus, with a few taps of the Google, viewers can watch the real Pearl beheading video -- and it ain't pretty.

He will be if a lawyer out in Whittier gets his way. Attorney Allen P. Wilkinson has filed three separate complaints about L.A.'s top law-enforcer, which, theoretically anyway, could result in Rocky's disbarment.

"He is a public official in charge of enforcing the law and he is committing what may be criminal acts," said Wilkinson. "This is just a matter of professional ethics. As lawyers, we should be held to the highest standards."

No argument there. Good to see someone trying to hold Delgadillo accountable.

...because he's a member of the NRA...

...then turns around and dresses her kid in an ammo belt and skull cap, and puts the photo (click here) on her Web site.

"Mommy, I wanna be like Zar-kee-wee!"

"OK, sweetie, just don't be a Republican. Now go pack some heat!"

John is going to die and he knows it. He knows it, not in the way we all abstractly know we are going, some day, to die. John’s sun is setting not over some far horizon but a near-by hill. On this sunny summer day in Encino, death’s dark shadow is falling.

Michael Moore’s new movie SiCKO looks at the problems and frustrations of our healthcare industry and how profit has taken both the care and health from our system. He also examines the uninsured and how everyone pays for them and they still don’t get first-rate care. A classic lose-lose. Moore’s new movie opening this week is coincidental to my subject. I learned about John’s condition on Saturday when I noticed that he seemed to be in pain and asked him what was wrong.

John has cancer and needs an operation. He has insurance but they have effectively just said no to his doctor’s request for the surgery to remove the rapidly growing tumor in his abdomen.

I wonder what medical insurance is for, if not to remove cancer. The answer is that the purpose of private insurance companies is to collect premiums and withhold services in the interests’ of their shareholders.

John’s insurance company did not exactly “decline” his doctor’s request. They are “studying” it and will get back to him. They are studying the policy to death—John’s death. One immutable law of medicine is that the dead don’t need benefits.

Since I've just accused Chris of having a crush on Paris, I will air my own personal crush: I've got a crush on Bibi. Benjamin Netanyahu, unlikely to ever land in a Lynwood jail, is smokin' sexy, particularly when he tells Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to shove it where the sun don't shine. I'm still working on the YouTube video to properly air my crush and get equal time on Fox News.

That's right, I own all four seasons of "The Simple Life" on DVD. Chris' obvious crush on Paris notwithstanding, he makes the point about Darfur coverage not making the front page. As someone who writes about Darfur and Vietnam and Iran and Turkey and the EU and all that crap that many American readers have to be beaten over the head with to get their attention, I also find the focus on trivial news (and the live jail-to-mansion coverage on TV at 1 a.m. this morning) frustrating. Conversely, as someone who writes about death and destruction and terrorism and fanaticism and political prisoners, it's nice to escape once in a while by popping on a DVD about Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie trying to make it on a farm in a podunk town. Mindless reality TV can be fun, and lots of news consumers probably have the same affection for mindless celebrity news, judging by the success of TMZ.com (my hat's off to Harvey Levin, whom I remember as the guy who asked people in Times Square what they thought about cases during "The People's Court").

But if could put a hard-news spin on Paris' contribution through her reality TV work, it would be this: Through her travels on "The Simple Life," she has helped expose the ugly bias that exists across the Heartland against Californians. We may talk with funny accents, wear colors and use the words "like" and "hot" a seemingly excessive number of times, but dammit, we're people too!

Our ever-articulate president, speaking at a press conference about whether comprehensive immigration reform means amnesty:

You know, I've heard all the rhetoric -- you've heard it, too -- about how this is amnesty. Amnesty means that you've got to pay a price for having been here illegally, and this bill does that.

Everybody got that?

From Mike Peters' cartoon series Mother Goose and Grimm.

Hah! Sucka.

If you're reading this now it's because the headline intrigued you. (Legal disclaimer: the headline of this blog item is not true in any sense and merely used as an example of sensational coverage about celebrities intended to point out out bad media behavior. Paris Hilton never ate my baby, because I don't have one. Furthermore, If I did have a baby I strongly believe that Ms. Hilton would refrain from eating it, because that's wrong and gross.)

If the headline was Darfur warlord ate my baby, chances are no one would car. Don't warlords always eat babies? Yawn.

I'm not blaming you for getting excited about Ms. Hilton's outrageous behavior. In fact, I blame me and my media cohorts for preempting coverage about things that might really affect your lives for "breaking news" about what Paris was wearing when she was sprung from her three-week county jail stay, what she learned from that life-changing experience, whether she had any new jail tats to show off and all the endless jabbering about whether the incarceration would change the wealthy heirress.

I'm sorry. I really am, but.. but.. ANNA NICOLE'S BUTT INFECTION!.. Ack! Sorry. I just can't seem to help myself... ANGELINA JOLIE HAS A FAKE LEG!... GEORGE CLOONEY HAS OPINIONS! ...BRAD PITT. BRAD PITT. BRAD PITT....aaaaaaaa

I'm thinking about today's L.A. Times story about the proliferation of cell phones in state prisons, this line in particular:

Some of the cellphones are smuggled in pieces, secreted in packages, books and body cavities. Multiple people can use the same phone.

On a less scatological note, isn't this problem easily fixed? Doesn't technology exist to block out cell-phone frequencies? Why not put that technology to use in our prisons?

Allow me to posit a conspiracy theory, using the Oliver Stone method of logical deduction...

Q: Who stood most to gain from Paris Hilton's release today?
A: Rocky Delgadillo. No one's talking about him and his wife any more.

Q: Right. And who's most responsible for Hilton's being released today, and not three weeks ago?
A: Rocky, I guess, seeing that he was the one who demanded to have her put back in jail after Sheriff Baca sprung her early.

Q: Shrewd, no? He engineered to have her released at precisely the time he would need a media distraction.
A: But how could he have known he would need a media distraction? I mean, he didn't know all his skeletons would come tumbling out of the closet this month.

Q: Unless he was the one who opened the closet door, so to speak.
A: Huh? Why would Rocky reveal his own dirt?

Q: He could have his reasons.
A: What reason would he have for wanting to make his wife look like a scofflaw and a flake?

Q: Ah, you've answered your own question. She cheats on her taxes. She gets him into trouble. She wrecks the car. She looks a lot worse than him in all this, no?
A: I guess, but why would he want to do that?

Q: Politicians are funny that way. Besides, marital problems do seem to be common in City Hall these days.
A: Maybe, but in the process he's destroyed his own political career.

Q: Or has he? What if he could somehow get everyone to forget about all this damaging information after it's served its initial purpose --
A: By getting us all to focus on Paris instead!

Q: Ah, now you see. (Cue: music.)

From an intra-office debate this morning arises the question: Who's fault is it that we (meaning America, collectively) are Paris Hilton crazy? Why are we so absorbed with this trivial story?

One school of thought says, it's the media's fault. The press gives us 24-7 Paris coverage, so Paris is all we talk about.

I take the opposite point of view: The press gives us what we want, for better or for (much) worse. Here at the Daily News, we see which front-page designs sell more copies, which online stories get the most hits. And it ain't the ones about Darfur. You can say the media should strive for more than the lowest common denominator, but then again, we're also striving for a steady paycheck.

To which the blame-the-media types respond: We only want Paris because that's what we've been trained to want. Our appetites are shaped by our culture, which, in turn, is shaped by the media.

I can accept that -- to a degree. No doubt, the more pop-culture garbage we ingest, the more of it we crave (kind of like fast food). But we still always have the option of not indulging, to "just say no," as it were. I, for one, don't troll the net looking for Paris coverage. I've never purchased People magazine. I have no interest in watching her interview on Larry King.

Of course, I am part of a small minority of dorks. But it's a free country, and I retain my free will, MTV or not. And as long as huge portions of the society continue to crave Paris, huge portions of Paris will continue to come our way.

As Gov. Arnold trots about the globe, hob-nobbing with foreign dignitaries all too eager to bask in the glow of his celebrity -- I don't remember Gray Davis getting the international VIP treatment -- some folks back home are complaining. The Daily News' own Harrison Sheppard reports:

Some critics think the governor ought to spend more time in California focused on domestic problems -- especially when there is a wildfire burning near Lake Tahoe and a constitutional deadline for the state budget approaching in less than a week -- and less time running around the globe as if he is a world leader....

A small group from California Young Democrats protested the governor's trip on the grounds of the Capitol on Monday, releasing a statement headlined "Schwarzenegger Fiddles in France While Tahoe Burns" and delivering "Wish You Were Here" postcards to his office.

My favorite quote comes from Bob Mulholland, California Democratic Party hitman and arguably the most partisan person in all of Sacramento (and that's saying something!):

It's just all about Arnold. It's not about the people of California. And if he stays there long enough, he'll see the smoke from the Lake Tahoe fire blowing over Europe.

Give Bob his due -- he always has the best lines.

Interesting, to me, though, that L.A.'s biggest political stars -- Arnold, Antonio, Bratton -- all choose to get out of town as much as humanly possible. What does that tell us?

So I realize the Mexica Movement is taken worth a grain of salt by basically everybody, and weighed whether or not it was worth giving them any more ink to address their recent libelous statements about me. Their first reaction to my column on the Mexicas was in the form of two letters to the editor, one to the Daily News and one to the Daily Breeze. The letter writer, Carlos Cordova, said that I wrote for WorldNetDaily.com, which I never have, and finished with a grossly insulting insinuation that my piece was tied to white supremacist groups. The Daily News cut those parts from the letter before publication, yet the Daily Breeze ran it in full. After I contacted the Daily Breeze about the letter-writer's errors, they graciously ran a correction in the next issue.

Looking at the Mexicas' most updated post about my column, Cordova's latest letter contains extra tidbits that apparently were not included in his drafts to the newspapers. While keeping the erroneous WorldNetDaily reference in there, he adds that I contribute to Jewish World Review's Political Mavens -- which is true; other "notoriously right-wing" contributors include former Mayor Richard Riordan, director David Zucker and "24" producer Joel Surnow -- and adds a reference to Klan bastard David Duke at the end, again suggesting collusion.

In an updated intro on their site, they state that I support "white supremacists" and have "ties to white supremacists." This, of course, is pure libel, and purely disgusting as well. In context, though, this group will call anyone who is against illegal immigration or in favor of immigration reform a white supremacist, realizing that vile phrase has a lot of bomb-throwing power. All racial or ethnic supremacist groups, groups that practice the belief that their race or ethnicity is superior, are equally evil and deplorable. This includes white, black, and Mexican or indigenous groups. All racism is bad. "White power," "black power," "brown power" -- all bad.

And for the record, I support the Senate compromise legislation on immigration reform. Needless to say, the Mexicas' assessments of my supposed allegiances and alliances are so off base there are no words to describe it.

Jonathan raises a good point about the "bong hits" case, but it seems to me an over-reach to see the kid's banner as "religious" speech, just because it happened to contain the word "Jesus." Indeed, the school's complaint was that the banner could be read to endorse drug use -- not that it promoted a sectarian message -- and as such, the Court ruled that the school had a legitimate reason to censor.

That said, it's amusing that the justices who lined up in support of "Bong Hits for Jesus" probably would have ruled against the kid in a Potomac heartbeat had his banner had simply read, "John 3:16."

This is what I love love love about new media: On Sunday, I was chatting with St. Louis blogger Gateway Pundit about how we might drum up publicity for the case of Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Roman Catholic priest and editor of a pro-democracy publication in Vietnam who was recently sentenced to eight years in prison (and not the first time he's sat behind bars for the cause of freedom). An hour later, the People's Democratic Party chairman and I were discussing creating a Web site to get the word out. By last night, the new blog was up and running. I love the Internet age!!

Click over and learn more about Father Ly. The image of guards clapping a hand over his mouth at his trial (as he said "Down with the Communist Party of Vietnam!" after the sham guilty verdict was read) is being widely circulated around the Web, much to the chagrin of the regime. We turned this image into the sidebar bug that you see, and hope as many bloggers as possible will stick it on their sites. We like to call that "igniting a blogstorm" in the name of freedom and democracy!!

They say that bad cases make bad laws and the Bong Hits for Jesus kid is a nearly perfect example. Yes, his signage was rude, disrespectful and meant to annoy. It succeeded on all counts. But here’s the problem. This case did not line up with the usual suspects fighting each other.

You see what was at stake wasn’t simply free speech but the ability of schools and government to regulate religious speech. The narrow question was whether this kid’s right of religious expression could be abridged by the schools. Some very non-liberal religious groups lined up on the side of the kid’s rights, but certainly not the content.

For example: The American Center for Law & Justice (founded by Pat Robertson), Liberty Legal Institute and the very conservative Rutherford Institute. They objected to the tone of the protest but filed amicus briefs to protect religious speech from being labeled as disruptive and banned.

Spokane's Spokesman-Review has stopped running columns from the New York Times' house "ethicist" Randy Cohen. The reason, as Mariel noted last week, is that Cohen was violating his own employer's ethics policy by giving money to political campaigns.

The best part of the story, though, is Spokesman-Review features' editor Ken Paulman's satirical take on how Cohen would answer his own ethical conundrum, were it posed by a reader:

Q: My employer has a clear policy against campaign contributions. I think I should be exempt from this policy and allowed to make donations, because I don't see any difference between this and other forms of civic involvement. What should I do?

A: By all means, ignore the policy, quietly make your contribution, and hope that no one finds out. If you get caught, agree to abide by the policy in the future, but don't acknowledge any wrongdoing - you'll be able to rationalize it after the fact.

H/T: Best of The Web Today.

The Supreme Court issued two notable free-speech rulings today. In one, it struck down the provision of the McCain-Feingold Act that bars some political advertising in the final weeks of a campaign. In the other, it ruled against the kid who unfurled a "Bong Hits for Jesus" banner above his high school (and, coincidentally, later got busted for selling pot).

Makes sense to me. The First Amendment's free-speech clause is, first and foremost, about protecting political speech -- especially during election season -- not protecting the right of some teenage punk to act like, well, a teenage punk.

Chris is right that the major sin is Cheney signing off on torture. However, Halliburton and Libby form part of the context of Cheney’s view that laws, presidential directives, subpoenas, and the Constitution itself, do not apply to him. The theme is lawlessness.

Among the great ironies of the Cheney Administration (He is, after all, his own unique branch of government, being, he claims, neither wholly executive nor wholly legislative) is that for a self-proclaimed conservative, he breaks most of the key values of classical conservatives. He is a moral relativist, believing that if he believes it is good, it is good. If he believes it serves his interests, it is permissible—maybe even mandatory. He is a Jacques Derrida follower in the extreme having deconstructed the meaning of the Constitution and re-assembled it to say what he believes. There is no objective truth, only opportunities to advance what he believes are in his, therefore President Bush’s and therefore the nation’s interests.

Torture? Well, it isn’t torture if he doesn’t believe it’s torture. Discomfort? Okay. Distress? Fine. Fear? Of course. You can bend the prisoner, strain the muscles and ligaments, and if a bone breaks, well, accidents happen. It should be fine, so long as you didn’t intend to break the bone. Intent is everything. Law is nothing.

No records. No memos. No compliance. No accountability. But there is a pattern.

If you want a real reason to fear Dick Cheney, this is it:

The subject now was more elemental: How much suffering could U.S. personnel inflict on an enemy to make him talk? Cheney's lawyer feared that future prosecutors, with motives "difficult to predict," might bring criminal charges against interrogators or Bush administration officials....

In a radio interview last fall, Cheney said, "We don't torture." What he did not acknowledge, according to Alberto J. Mora, who served then as the Bush-appointed Navy general counsel, was that the new legal framework was designed specifically to avoid a ban on cruelty. In international law, Mora said, cruelty is defined as "the imposition of severe physical or mental pain or suffering." He added: "Torture is an extreme version of cruelty."

The Justice Department delivered a classified opinion on Aug. 1, 2002, stating that the U.S. law against torture "prohibits only the worst forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" and therefore permits many others.... Distributed under the signature of Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, the opinion also narrowed the definition of "torture" to mean only suffering "equivalent in intensity" to the pain of "organ failure ..... or even death."...

That same day, Aug. 1, 2002, Yoo signed off on a second secret opinion, the contents of which have never been made public. According to a source with direct knowledge, that opinion approved as lawful a long list of interrogation techniques proposed by the CIA -- including waterboarding, a form of near-drowning that the U.S. government has prosecuted as a war crime since at least 1901. The opinion drew the line against one request: threatening to bury a prisoner alive.

I wish we would spend a fraction of the energy, time, and money we've wasted over the trumped-up Valerie Plame case looking into the administration's immoral and illegal torture policies.

If there were a disease that caused excessive hubris in politicians, Rocky Delgadillo would have it bad. But eh wouldn't be the only California pol. In this week's Viewpoint column, I invent such a disease as a way to explain the incresingly odd behavior of some of our leaders

Since Mariel had so much fun smacking me about for what she believes was the mischaracterization of "No Guns" as a gun-control group, I can't help but respond to her characterization of the GOP as a "rabid" anti-immigration party. After all, two leading voices on behalf of comprehensive immigration reform are the GOP's last national candidate (Bush) and the man who may be its next (McCain). Here in California, the state's top Republican (Arnold) is also no strident immigration critic.

Michael Kamburowski -- the illegal Aussie / GOP operative -- is, according to the Chronicle, "a former registered lobbyist for Americans for Tax Reform and a top operative for the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project, both founded by conservative activist Grover Norquist." And Norquist, it should be noted, is also no anti-immigration fanatic. Here's what the decidely right-wing WorldNet Daily had to say about Norquist two years ago:

Norquist champions an extreme libertarian view about illegal immigration – essentially advocating open borders without regard for the associated security, financial or social implications. He makes no secret of his contempt for conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly who rightly disagree. He told the New Yorker, "I think Phyllis's theory is: Foreigners suck."

Say what you will about these Republicans' attitude toward immigration, but there doesn't seem to be anything hypocritical (or racist) about it.

The party of immigrant bashing shows its true colors, or rather how color influences the rabid "send 'em all home" rhetoric it now employs. Apparenty not only does the party not condemn the millions of WASP immigrants in this country illegally, such as all those Candadian doing the comedy jobs Americans don't want, it hires them!

This from the SF Chron:

Michael Kamburowski, an Australian immigrant who served as the California Republican Party's chief operating officer, abruptly resigned Sunday -- less than 24 hours after The Chronicle reported he had been ordered deported in 2001, jailed in connection with the order, and now has a $5 million wrongful arrest lawsuit pending against U.S. Department of Homeland Security officials.

And it just keeps getting better...

Kamburowski is a former registered lobbyist for Americans for Tax Reform and a top operative for the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project, both founded by conservative activist Grover Norquist. Nehring -- also a former senior adviser and consultant to Norquist's Washington, D.C., operation -- worked with Kamburowski at Americans for Tax Reform in the 1990s.

The Chronicle reported Sunday that court records indicate Kamburowski, who arrived in the United States in 1995, was ordered deported by U.S. immigration officials in 2001. He was jailed three years later for about one month at the Wachenhut prison in Jamaica, N.Y., in connection with the immigration matter, according to federal court documents.

How psyched is Lt. Gov. John Garamendi that Arnold is traipsing around Europe, hanging out with Tony Blair and some important French dude while Tahoe is burning down? Well, the LG is filling the leadership void with important words for those affected by the raging fire in the forests south of the big lake, signing important pieces of paper and holding press conferences.

Christine Peters, a neighbor, is one of the few people who is fighting LAUSD over a proposed new school in the heaily gentrifiying Echo Park area, which comes to the board again tonight (see press release from Peters after the jump). The LAUSD condemed homes just south of Sunset in order to build a new school even though all the evidence points to the fact that they don't need one there.

The local school has lost half of its attendence in over the past five years. Surrounding elementary schools have lost a lot of students. And there's already a vacant LAUSD school site a few blocks away. Why? Because the hispter professionals are displacing immigrant familes, and hispters can afford not to send their children, if they have any, to public school.

David Frum of National Review has written about his "conversion" on immigration. He used to favor a more liberal policy, but now he's become a restrictionist. Though I don't find the reasons for his change of heart compelling -- I think that rationalizing and liberalizing our immigration system go hand in hand -- I am heartened by his honest treatment of the many yahoos to be found in the anti-immigration fever swamps:

In the late 1980s, a group of self-described "paleoconservatives" had congealed around the magazine Chronicles. For them, the great issue was not incomes, but race. They mixed their ferocious hostility to immigration with savage denunciations of the civil-rights movement of the 1960s--and, for that matter, the Union cause in the 1860s.

The just-hatched Internet then started to sprout websites devoted entirely to the immigration issue. All too often, the immigration reformers decided to perceive no-enemies-to-the-racialist-right. They might be exclusionist at the borders of the nation; at their own port of entry, however, they lifted their lamp to welcome people who wanted to argue the intellectual inferiority of African Americans, or compared federal law-enforcement agents to the Gestapo, or insisted the Jews had brought the Holocaust upon themselves, or despised America's Spanish-speaking neighbors as inferiors and enemies, or dined with David Duke. Has ever a cause been worse served by its alleged advocates?

You'll recall that I wrote what was, I thought, a fair post on this subject a couple weeks ago, noting that the racists are to the restrictionist cause what the reconquista types are to pro-immigration groups -- a pox and a liability. But this observation generated some angry e-mail, in which readers complained that I was calling all restrictionists racists, which I explicitly did not.

It's nice to see a restrictionist admit the obvious: The movement needs to purge its own ranks -- for its own good and that of the country.

"Your Opinions" has space for repetitive trivial letters, but no space for my numerous serious letters.
So I cancelled my subscription and you can shove the "Daily Rag" up you editorial a$$.

Paris Hilton is due to be released at any time, and after her come-to-Jesus moment of twentysomething harrowing days behind bars (likely laughing at Rocky Delgadillo the whole way) she's determined to do something positive with her life. (After she throws down at Caesar's Palace with Jell-O shots and scantily-clad men, that is.) I thought that's what "The Simple Life" was, but apparently she's thinking more along the lines of helping kids with cancer or something like that. I, however, believe she could do a great service by starting a mugshot makeover service. Harvey Levin might have fewer damning pictures to run, but celebrity troublemakers everywhere would be eternally grateful:

(That's Paris' mug from her Sept. 2006 arrest, and Nick Nolte after dropping a hairdryer in the bathtub.)

The timing of this is particularly unsettling, as we've all been reminded of the Daniel Pearl kidnapping and beheading in the movie "A Mighty Heart": After more than 100 days in captivity in Gaza, the al-Qaida linked group holding BBC correspondent Alan Johnston has released a video titled "Alan's Appeal." Johnston appears to be wearing a suicide bomb belt in the video:

"I have been dressed in what is an explosive belt, which the kidnappers say will be detonated if there is an attempt to storm the area. They say they are ready to turn the hideout into what they describe as a death zone if there is an attempt to free me by force."

The AP described Johnston as nervous, stressed out and "jittery."

When Israel rolled out of the Gaza Strip, al-Qaida elements rolled in. I doubt Hamas has cared till now, since they have a common goal of obliterating Israel. The militant elements and increasing lawlessness only fed Hamas' power and tunnel-vision goal of Israeli destruction. Gaza is the anarchist pit it is today because of Hamas, and if Alan Johnston is killed they will also have his blood on their hands.

God help Alan.

Our own Sue Doyle, out at the immgration-rights rally in Hollywood today, reports that only about 1,000 demonstrators showed up though organizers had predicted/expected 15,000:

"Turnout at an immigrant rights' rally was far lower than expected today, with many speculating potential marchers chose to stay home to watch the game between the Mexican and U.S. national soccer teams.

The CONCACAF Gold Cup rivalry between Mexico and the U.S. kicked off in Chicago at noon Pacific time, just as the rally began in front of the Kodak Theater."

The U.S. came from behind to beat Mexico, 2-1.

This as Bush hopes to finally score a "GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLLLL!!!!" on immigration reform this week in the Senate...

(By the way, the photo's from the soccer game, not the immigrant-rights rally. You may have figured that out.)

"Chemical Ali" is going to the gallows, a small consolation for the people of Iraqi Kurdistan who lost 180,000 in the Anfal genocide. During the trial a taped conversation between Ali (who is Saddam Hussein's cousin) and Saddam was played:

"'I will strike them with chemical weapons and kill them all and damn anyone who is going to say anything,' a voice identified by prosecutors as 'Chemical Ali' Hassan al-Majeed is heard saying.

'Yes it's effective, especially on those who don't wear a mask immediately, as we understand,' a voice identified as Saddam is heard saying on another tape.

'Sir, does it exterminate thousands?' a voice asks back.

'Yes, it exterminates thousands and forces them not to eat or drink and they will have to evacuate their homes without taking anything with them, until we can finally purge them,' the voice identified as Saddam answers."

Kurds are rightly frustrated that the verdict today doesn't relate to Halabja, the chemical-gas attack that killed 5,000 townspeople in March 1988, leaving the streets littered with bodies including mothers clutching their children. (Many graphic photos of the slaughter and accounts can be found here, and I encourage everyone to learn more about this dark moment in history, and the darkest deeds of Saddam and crew.

It ended as we thought it might, and feared it would: Ohio mum Jessie Davis, set to give birth to a baby girl on July 3, was found dead, and the reported father of her 2-year-old son and unborn child, married patrolman Bobby Cutts Jr., will be charged with two counts of murder in her death. Adding to the tragedy is the fact that the toddler seems to have witnessed at least some of the crime, as indicated by his statements.

Listening to Fox News on Sirius on the way into the newsroom, I heard the head of the search effort confirm that their teams had not found Davis' body, lending credence to rumor that Cutts or someone else had led police to the body. I also heard a racial element brought up -- initial concern from the NAACP that Jessie would be found safe, and concern that no one would rush to judgment against the African-American Cutts.

But this isn't a racial issue. It's an issue of the intimate partner of a pregnant woman usually being the first suspect in such a slaying, the man with the most emotional involvement and most to lose or gain -- either from the new life, or from the mother and child's deaths. Cutts, who is also the father of Los Angeles model and actress Nikki Giavasis' child, has had a couple of legal dust-ups, though being a policeman himself. The facts will come out in the trial, and I hope that those who would use the trial to advance any sort of agenda will refrain from doing so.

Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet was greeted by protesters at the St. Regis Monarch Resort in Dana Point yesterday -- Vietnamese bravely speaking out against the communist government's abysmal human-rights record. "People in Vietnam, cannot speak, cannot express their feelings, so we here in the freedom land, we speak for them," Minh Vo of Lawndale, who took a bus to the protest, told KABC-7.

Think she's not being serious? Straight from the horse's mouth, Nguyen Duc Binh, ideology chief of Vietnam's Communist Party, has said, “Open discussion is dangerous."

Last night I went over to Paramount for a screening of "A Mighty Heart," the story of the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter (and Encino's own) Daniel Pearl as related by his wife, Mariane, above left, who was portrayed by Angelina Jolie. (The other part of the tabloid twosome, Brad Pitt, was a producer.) The film, which opens today, is very, very good, and faithful to the facts of the case. Considering it was directed by Michael Winterbottom ("The Road to Guantanamo"), the movie resists descent into condemnation of the U.S. War on Terror -- in fact, in one scene where the Pakistani authorities hang a guy from the ceiling to obtain needed info about Pearl's kidnappers, the American security services official is clearly disturbed (though also says later that he, like many of us, would like to see Pearl's kidnappers and beheaders strung up and flogged). There are a few clips of Gitmo throughout the film, clips that related to the kidnappers' demands that the U.S. release terror suspects. The film was done before the hairified Khalid Sheik Mohammed claimed in March that he was the one who killed Pearl, but there was a footnote stating at the end that Mohammed reportedly committed the slaying -- and that he currently sits in Gitmo.

So the film was good. The panel discussion afterward was not. Hosted by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the panel also featured a rabbi from the Progressive Jewish Alliance and the executive director of Progressive Christians Uniting. If you're noticing a pattern, you're right: Pegged as a diverse discussion, it was instead people who all thought the same yet listed different religions on their curriculum vitae. My "date," Dan from Gay Patriot, referring to a recent report that CAIR's membership has dropped 90 percent since 9-11, wondered aloud if CAIR's entire membership was there in the Sherry Lansing Theatre.

I don't want to spoil my next column, so I won't go too much into the evening here. One highlight of the night, though, was a short address by the Pakistani consul general, who congratulated the film's producers "for finding the worst slums of Karachi!"

Sucks to be them, after a new Gallup poll showed American confidence in Congress at an all-time, pathetic low: 14 percent. To put that into context, Bush has also hit a new polling low, but still has 26 percent approval. AND the Gallup poll found that Americans had slightly more confidence in HMOs than Congress! Ouch!

That big, giant crashing sound you hear, by the way, is the "mandate" falling to the floor and shattering into little bitty pieces...

UPDATE: Chris wrote stuff on this earlier. I'm just coming back from my days off and a mind-numbing CAIR rally last night, so forgive me. Congress still sucks!

Gee, nothing like a few sharp words to draw some attention! Apparently my little repartee with Mariel (and to a lesser extent, Jonathan) today got the interest of the folks over at Mayor Sam:

There hasn't been a dust-up at any of the Times blogs yet to date that is like the one at the Daily News blog friendlyfire between lite-right Chris Weinkopf and resident Mexican American (her description, not mine) Mariel Garza.

It turns out that for people who write for print, both Chris and Mariel as bloggers are refreshingly incautious.

Hmm, I guess I'll take that as a compliment! Although less flattering is this response in the post's combox:

Boring! Mayor Sam delete post

That's because if you want the real heavy-duty sparring, you have to read our comboxes.

Chris raises good and valid points in his response to me. There is a lot of Democratic money. When you get rich enough, you can afford to be a Democrat again. For example when Bloomberg was only a multi-millionaire he was a Democrat. When he became a billionaire he went Republican. And now that he’s a multi-billionaire, he’s moving back towards the center. I’m sure following the 2008 election he’ll rejoin the Democrats.

The super rich business people give to both sides. They have to protect themselves. After Fox’s presidential victory in Mexico, I was interviewing a very wealthy industrialist and wondered if he were happy and proud that Mexico was finally a two party nation. He shook his head sadly and remarked ruefully that he was distraught because now he’d have to pay twice as much in bribes (the word he used was mordida. We call it contributions).

My own non-scientific polling on reaction to the news that media contributions are overwhelmingly directed at Democrats is that liberals say, “Of course. Bright, creative, educated people are going to more liberal than not.” Even I am willing to see this as hubris. There are lots of bright, articulate and creative conservatives. They are however, as a group, far too smart to try to earn their living in journalism and putting ink on dead trees.

Jonathan has written what I think to be a compelling argument for why journalists should give to the political causes of their choice. After all, better that one's biases be laid bare for all to see, and the public can judge the fairness of his or her work. I couldn't agree more.

Jonathan says it's "mostly conservative people" who are upset by this practice. That hasn't been my experience. The one person to complain about journalists giving to campaigns at this site is Mariel, and no one's ever accused her of being a conservative! As for what I've heard from actual conservatives, the complaint isn't about journalists' giving money to pols -- most, I suspect, would agree with Jonathan on this point -- but that the pols collecting the money here are overwhelmingly liberal. This, conservatives say, is evidence of liberal media bias. To which charge Jonathan replies:

Does anyone seriously think that if we were to search the political giving records of the publishers, owners, shareholders and boards of directors of the major media conglomerates that the vast preponderance of their contributions would not go to Republican candidates and conservative causes?

I'll bite. Yes, I do seriously think that the "vast preponderance" of their contributions would not go to Republican candidates and conservative causes.

Hey, in the immortal words of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" There's no need for Chris and Mariel to take up arms on this.

There are at least two distinct issues. One is the government's tradition of funding frauds in the "community" who siphon money out of the system and deliver wealth only to themselves. These programs tend to combine the worst of capitalism (greed) and government (inefficiency)--an unbeatable pairing. The other issue is the guns.

As someone who has hunted far more the Mitt Romney (an admittedly low bar), I do not hate guns. I once carried my ACLU card next to my NRA card. I would, however, prefer that we eliminate weapons from our streets that are only designed to kill people. Few hunters need Uzies or hollow point or armor piercing rounds to hunt anything other than people.

The NYTimes wonders today at the exploding death rate from gunfire in Oakland. It is no mystery. Gun deaths are caused by guns

Yes, it is true that people kill people, but guns, automatic weapons of large caliber, make it so much easier.

For the safety of all, let's keep high caliber weapons out of the hands of writers.

Mariel, I never characterized No Guns as a gun-control group. I characterized Big Weasel as a "voice" for gun control.

Anyway, you're right that TV reporters can engage in sloppy reporting, but as you've noted, they''re not alone.

Chris's evidence in the previous post backing up his incorrect characterization of No Guns as a gun control group (rather than a sham anti-gang program in LA) is pretty pathetic. Chris, really. One news story from a local TV station? You and I very well know that TV people often engage in sloppy reporting and this seems to be just that case.

C'mon. Just do like Rocky and admit you were wrong.

Mariel, please note that I never called No Guns a gun-control group, and I said that it worked on "anti-gang efforts." I was just pointing out the irony of Big Weasel's being a "voice" for gun control -- which is how he has been described in the press.

Anyway, this was no attempt to "craft evidence" for my argument -- unless you mean my argument that city gang programs don't work. I made no argument about gun control whatsoever, except to note the humorous irony (kind of like when Ted Haggard got busted for having sex with a gay prostitute). But I don't for a second pretend that the hypocrisy of one man damns an entire cause; if it did, there would be no worthwhile causes out there.

Big Weasel's actions reflect on him alone -- as should mine.

Sorry Chris, but I just have to call you out on the jab at some "gun control" group, in the entry below. "No Guns" might sound like a gun control org, but it's just a catchy name for a questional gang-intervention program in Los Angeles.

Sadly, I find this typical conservative knee-jerk reaction from gun nuts who craft evidence for their argument in places where it doesn't exists. This is case in point. Anyhow, the LA Weekly did a great story a few weeks back the group's founder.

Peggy Noonan writes about what she surmises to be the dark underside of Hillary Clinton's otherwise flowers-and-smiles campaign approach:

It is a new Web site called HillaryIs44.com. It is rather mysterious. It does not divulge who is running the site, or who staffs it. It is not interactive; it has one informative voice, and its target audience seems to be journalists and free-lance oppo artists. ...

Encouraging readers to send in "confidential tips," its primary target and obvious obsession is Barack Obama. "Senator Barack Obama (D-Rezko) is busy lately lying about President Bill Clinton" and "attacking entire communities." "We have written extensively on Obama, and his indicted slumlord friend Antoin 'Tony' Rezko. We have repeatedly warned David Axelrod, Michelle Obama and Barack Obama that this story is not going away." The Obama campaign is "still posing as innocents incapable of doing anything unsavory even as evidence mounts that unsavory is their favorite dish." "Dirty Obama Smear" and "Obama's Dirty Mud Politics" are two recent headlines.

This appears to be the subterranean part of Hillary's campaign, the part that quietly coexists with the warm, chuckling lady playing the jukebox with her husband. It coexists with the Maya Angelou part, the listening tour part, the filmed parts.

It is the war room part. I suspect the site is a back door to that war room.

Political Contributions by the Press
Jonathan Dobrer

People, well, mostly conservative people, are shocked, shocked that members of the press contribute to political parties, causes and candidates. This seems to violate some ethical duty to non-partisan objectivity and compromises what is left of journalistic integrity.

Journalists, according to this view, are supposed to be above the fray and be without passion, viewpoint or any demonstration of involvement with the issues of the day—both great and small.

Somehow, they seem to believe that Star Trek’s “prime directive” of non-interference is an ethical duty. Frankly, I don’t think this is even a close call. Journalists take no vows of political celibacy, nor are they bound to be indifferent to the moral issues of our time.

On the contrary, one of the great faults in journalism, in all media, is pretending to even-handedness. When an Op-Ed page runs two equal columns—point-counterpoint—it presents the sides as being of equal weight. This is often not true, and mainstream science, politics or ethical issues seem to be no stronger than fringe and marginal opinion.

This is mockery of “objectivity,” and the paradox is that these presentations imply that there is no objective truth. One idea is as true as another.

Add Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez to the chorus of those defending Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for making the common-sense observation that watching Spanish TV is no way to learn English:

Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, told reporters yesterday that Schwarzenegger's view is shared by many first-generation immigrants, including about a third of the speaker's relatives.

“First-generation immigrants, when they come here, they either want you to speak your language and to keep you real close to your customs or they want you to totally assimilate because they don't want anyone to discriminate,” Núñez said.

“And Governor Schwarzenegger, I think, is simply expressing as a first-generation immigrant a belief that is prevalent among first-generation immigrants – it's the truth,” he said.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson

An anguished Kathy Hilton loudly complained to Fox News show host Greta Van Susteren that her daughter spends long hours staring at the ceiling in her private cell at the Los Angeles County Jail. That ignited more public wails that since being dumped back in jail, Hilton continues to get the red carpet treatment. A relay of guards, psychologists, and doctors stumbled over each other to cater to her whims in her private cell.

This was not a totally bad thing. The public rage over Hilton’s royal treatment momentarily cast a flicker of glare on the plight of the hundreds of other women in the L.A. County jail that suffer mental disorders but don’t have a private room and a wave of doting jail personnel that deal with their medical needs. It’s not malicious or deliberate neglect on the part of authorities, or even that Hilton threw her privileged weight around to get upscale treatment.
The L.A. County jails do medical exams, intake screenings, and interviews to determine the proper treatment and medication for a prisoner. But massive overcrowding and the revolving door nature of prisoners coming and going in urban jails, makes it virtually impossible for jail authorities to provide private rooms or cells for any but the worst medical cases, or in Hilton’s case, the most privileged. L.A. County Jail is no exception to this rule. Though Hilton is a glaring example of the favored status that some prisoners receive, she’s hardly the only one. There’s a troubling pecking order in many jails that determine who get timely medical attention, and who doesn’t. That order is riddled with class, race and gender bias.

... because he's likely headed for the slammer. On gun charges:

LOS ANGELES - The founder of an anti-violence group called No Guns pleaded not guilty Thursday to federal weapons charges.

Hector "Big Weasel" Marroquin is accused of selling an assault rifle, a machine gun, two pistols and two silencers to undercover federal agents last fall. He could face up to 50 years in prison if convicted.

What's more, City Hall paid this big weasel $1.5 million as a subcontractor on anti-gang efforts.

Gee, might this be a sign that City Hall's anti-gang programs aren't working?

"No More Kings" This one's for Emperor Cheney.

Praise for the Senate's vote to raise fuel-efficiency standards comes by way of Republicans for Environmental Protection, a group whose motto, as the above image shows, is "Conservation is Conservative." The REP press release says:

"The benefits of enacting stronger fuel economy standards are too significant to be ignored. This is one of the biggest steps that Congress can take to reduce the burden of high gasoline prices for the American consumer. It is also the best thing that Congress can do to ensure that Detroit's automakers produce vehicles that can compete in the face of high energy prices," REP Government Affairs Director David Jenkins said.

"There is nothing conservative about waste. Energy conservation, the practice of minimizing waste, is something every conservative should support," Jenkins said.

And, of course, there's also a foreign-policy argument to be made that reducing gas consumption would choke off the revenue stream for Islamist terrorists.

The New York Post reports that NBC will pay Paris Hilton $1 million for her first post-jail interview. Scratch that: News-gathering organizations don't pay for interviews, remember? They'll just probably pay her and/or her family $1 million for "help" assembling pictures or some such, and then Paris will just so happen to give them an interview. Jail will turn out to have been a rather profitable experience for the gal the Post describes as the "celebrity heirhead":

The "Today" windfall alone will mean $43,578 a day for her three-plus weeks staring at the four walls of the Century Regional Detention Center in Lynwood, Calif., and the Twin Towers Correctional Facility in downtown L.A.

The Post has learned that the cunning con also inked a deal to sell her first photos to Getty Images,. They will run in People magazine, along with the first print interview, next Friday.

The Getty deal is worth a staggering $300,000, sources said.

The Post's headline, as usual, says it all: "So crime does pay, Paris."

I must confess I get a kick out of this Mötley Crüe (don't forget the umlauts) lawsuit against the band's manager. Among other things, the rockers seem to think that defendant made them look stupid -- which is pretty funny, as the band has done that just fine, all by itself, for two decades.

A follow-up to Mariel's post on reporters who give to political causes: The MSNBC survey found that: "Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."

Really? Journalists lean to the left? You don't say! The report adds:

The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms — at least among the donors, who are a tiny fraction of the roughly 100,000 staffers in newsrooms across the nation.

On what may or may not be an unrelated note, a new Gallup poll finds that only 23 percent of Americans have confidence in TV news (down from 31 percent a year ago), and 22 percent have confidence in newspapers (down from 30 percent a year ago).

But we in the media need not despair! We still rate better than Congress, which comes in dead last of all the ranked institutions, rating below even HMOs. Congress got just 14 percent of the public's confidence -- down from 19 percent last year, suggesting that the Pelosi Revolution hasn't done much to change the public's mind about politicians.

All of which indicates that the relationship between politics and the media is as dysfunctional as Tony Blair says it is.

* UPDATE: I originally misquoted the stat on Congress, it's since been corrected.

This week in my column I wrote about Hrant Dink (pictured), the ethnic Armenian editor who was assassinated in Turkey after angering ultra-nationalists with his acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide. But there are other vital press-freedom cases around the globe that deserve attention as well:

ALAN JOHNSTON: The BBC correspondent has been held longer than any other foreign hostage in Gaza -- Wednesday marked his 100th day in captivity. Since Hamas took over the already lawless Strip, the outlook is even more grim for Johnston's safe return. The group claiming to hold Johnston reportedly has links to al-Qaida.

FATHER NGUYEN VAN LY: The Roman Catholic priest and editor of a pro-democracy publication was recently sentenced to eight years in prison, part of a government crackdown on democracy activists.

THE NEW YOUTH 4: Jin Haike, journalist Xu Wei, Yang Zili and freelance writer Zhang Honghai are serving from eight to 10 years behind bars for establishing the New Youth Society, writing articles that explored democracy and reform in China.

SAMIR SADAGATOGLU and RAFIK TAGI: In a case that I'm surprised hasn't cause more outrage, two Azeri journalists were imprisoned for an article in weekly newspaper Senet that was deemed insulting to Islam. The article, written by Tagi, explored the peace, tolerance and stability in European nations as opposed to traditionally Muslim societies. Sadagatoglu, the editor, got a longer sentence than Tagi. Both men are Muslim.

These short profiles only scratch the surface of the penalties faced by journalists around the globe for simply exercising freedom of expression. Read about more disturbing cases at Reporters Without Borders.

So my mom's freaking out about my upcoming trip to Tunisia, even though the last al-Qaida attack there was in 2002 and the government is providing extra security to our press party.

But let's face it -- the danger of North Africa pales in comparison to the danger of being pregnant! If it isn't some crazy person who wants to steal the newborn baby, it's a father-to-be who doesn't want the kid or some relationship strife or whatnot. After seeing all these cases, and noting that homicide is the leading cause of death for a mother-to-be after pregnancy complications, what can a woman say but "WHEW ... At least I'm not pregnant!"

In response to Salman Rushdie's impending knighthood, some Pakistani clerics have decided to honor Osama bin Laden. From Al-Jazeera:

"Allama Tahir Ashrafi, head of the Pakistan Ulema Council, said on Thursday that the group would give bin Laden the title "Saifullah" - which means 'Sword of God' - for 'serving Muslims by waging jihad against infidels'. 'If Britain can give a knighthood to Rushdie, we too have the right to make awards to our leaders and heroes,' Ashrafi said.

He said that while he was not in contact with bin Laden, the reward would reach the fugitive al-Qaeda chief 'at an appropriate time'."

Like next Saturday at brunch? Not in contact -- whatever!

The really amusing part is that they're gleefully rubbing their hands together, thinking that this is actually a "we'll show them!" move. But whereas a novelist being granted knighthood results in death threats and overt approval of revenge suicide bombings, our response to Osama getting some silly award mainly elicits eye-rolling. Which is the normal reaction?

VP Cheney Not Executive Material

Vice President Cheney claims that he does not have to follow the rules that bind other members of the Executive Branch of government. We have always sensed that he believes the rules don’t apply to him. It is his unique rationale however that makes his regular rule breaking seem insipid and uninspired. His theory of why he doesn’t have to submit his records to the archives, and why it is fine and proper for him to destroy his phone records and visitor logs and not to protect secret information as others are mandated to is so creative as to be nearly admirable—as theory.

The Vice President of the United States is asserting that he is not a member of the Executive branch! Wow! A whole new “estate.” (And God knows he can afford a whole new estate, maybe even a whole state, on his Halliburton holdings.)

The argument is that the Vice President is not really wholly under the Executive because there are also Constitutionally prescribed Legislative duties, such a presiding over the Senate and voting in case of a tie.

In this original theory, he sets up a whole new way of achieving vice presidential supremacy—almost certainly not envisioned by the Founders. According to Cheney’s reasoning, the most powerful position in the American system is the Vice President, for in this office the Executive and Legislative meet. Like a Colossus, it bestrides the other two. Now, if he could only gain control of the Judicial, by putting his people in the Attorney General’s office and guiding Supreme Court nominations…

If this sells, the office of Vice President will be worth far more than the “warm bucket of spit” that Vice President John Nance Garner called it. In leaving the Executive branch, all Cheney would have to give up in trade for this unprecedented power, would be executive privilege. Might want to re-think this one.

Now they just need to invent a machine that can raise our kids, landscape our lawns, and man the drive-thru window.

The Wall Street Journal today features the text of a speech in which Tony Blair rips the media for its sensationalism and for blurring the line between reporting and advocacy. He offers some spot-on observations:

I was profoundly dismayed to read MSNBC's list of 144 journalists who have contributed to political campaigns . But even more than that, I was suprised that so many were newspaper reporters. You kinda expect that from TV people.

Shame on them. Rule No. 1 is not to enter into conflicts of interest. And I don't know what's more C of I than donatintg to a political campaign. Copy editors and designers are less shameful, but reporters covering the Iraq war? That's bad.

I did enjoy seeing LA Timesers on the list. I guess the general haughtiness of the staff there doesn't necessarily extend to ethical excellence. II'd like to point out with some smugness that there are no L.A. Daily Newers, and not just because they don't pay us enough to be giving any away. There aren't any MediaNews companies (which owns the DN) on the list either.

Special wag of the finger to Randy Cohen ethics columnist for The New York Times.

UPDATE: On closer reading, there were a couple Media News paper employees listed. My bad:

San Jose Mercury News, Rachel Wilner, sports editor, $250 to John Kerry in June 2004.

Wilner said her understanding was that the paper's policy allows contributions unless it would present the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Calif., Robert Taylor, fine arts reporter, $500 to the Democratic National Committee, October 2004.

"I write about visual arts for the Times," Taylor said. "I'm a features writer and reviewer. If I were a political reporter, I might have made a different decision."

Bridget may be bent out of shape about "Office Space" being snubbed on the AFI top film list, but there is a far greater outrage here. Its name is "Titanic" (No. 83 on the AFI list).

How can any movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio possibly be eligible for such an honor? Let alone one that inflicted an excruciating Celine Dion theme song on the world?

Really, "Titanic" had some awesome effects, but with its stock characters, cliched dialogue, and wretched plot, has there ever been a worse "great" movie? I mean, "Jurassic Park" had some snazzy effects, too, but no serious person would ever think of putting it on any "Best of" list.

Yet what always bugged me most about this overrated abomination was the ending -- spoiler alert for the one person who hasn't seen it. It's when the Kate Winslet character dies and goes to "heaven," where she is greeted not by her husband of half a century, or her kids, or her parents, but ... some guy she did on a boat 80 years ago.

Then again, seeing that she was being sent to spend eternity on the set of this movie, maybe it wasn't Heaven after all, but Hell.

From Thursday's Daily News letters:

Betrayal at the top

Re "It's official: 2nd term for Bratton" (June 20): As the wife of an LAPD officer, I am disgusted that Bratton was appointed for another term as police chief. He could not be more undeserving of this honored position. He turned his back on these devoted, hardworking officers when he did not stand by them after the MacArthur Park incident. It is obvious that they did exactly what they were trained to do. No wonder the morale is down in the department.

Being a police officer can be a lonely life for the officer and his wife and children. But nothing could be more upsetting than to have the "father" of the LAPD betray his "family." He let politics get in the way of performing his duty as police chief.

Again "Citizen Kane" is No. 1. Again a colossal snub for cinematic classic "Office Space."

I believe Orson Welles has Milton's stapler...

As a Catholic, this is how I envision confession now:

"Bless me, Father, for I have driven like a bat out of hell in the car-pool lane with no passengers."

"For your penance, say two Our Fathers and ride the Blue Line for a week."

Another defeat for Assemblyman Lloyd Levine: Not only did the Assembly fail to pass his euthanasia bill, but now Sacramento is actively working on initiatives to discourage suicide.

This is encouraging news. Far better to give the hopeless hope than to give them hemlock.

Police Release More Detail About Juneteenth Violence
By Jon Byman
"Some people think the violence takes away from the real meaning of Juneteenth."

Think so?

The news is buzzing with the story of a mob beating to death a motorist during Juneteenth celebrations in Texas. The AP reports:

An angry crowd beat a man to death after a vehicle he was riding in struck and injured a young girl, police said Wednesday.

Police believe 2,000 to 3,000 people were in the area for a Juneteenth celebration when the attack occurred Tuesday night.

The driver had stopped to check on the little girl at the entrance to an apartment complex when a group of men attacked him, authorities said. The passenger, David Rivas Morales, 40, got out to try to help the driver, but the crowd turned on him, said police Commander Harold Piatt.

Morales was beaten to death by as many as 20 men and left lying in a parking lot, Piatt said. A preliminary autopsy listed blunt force trauma as the cause of death.

The little girl, 3 or 4 years old, was taken to a hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

Now the AP mentions no races, but given that it was a Juneteenth celebration, it's quite possible the crowd was predominantly African-American. And the victim's last name -- Morales -- suggest he was a Latino. That doesn't mean race was a factor, but usually when a mob of one color kills someone of another, the story quickly develops a racial angle. We'll see where this one goes ...

* Update: A mob smashed up a car and beat up another motorist after a Juneteenth celebration in Milwaukee. Once again, though, the news story excludes any racial details.

Everyone who's anyone -- or at least who is an A-list L.A. Latino politician -- will be at fake swearing in of Yolie Flores Aguilar tonight. Yolie, you may remember, is one of MAV's super ninja school reformers.

MAV himself (Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, of course) will be doing the swearing in honors even though: 1) this is not a real swearing in; 2) MAV has no authority to swear in candidates; and 3) Yolie can't take office until July.

The event is, of course, symbolic of the not-at-all fake power that MAV now wields over LAUSD with his quorum. So, real or not, it counts.

Remember Tennie Pierce, the firefighter who claimed racism (and sought $2.7 million) because some buddies slipped dog food into his firehouse dinner? Well, it turns out that he's not alone in issuing seemingly overblown accusations. As the Daily News' Eugene Tong reports:

In a legal victory for the beleaguered Los Angeles Fire Department, a jury declined Tuesday to award damages to an African-American firefighter who claimed he suffered harassment and retaliation after he complained about racism in the agency.

Jabari S. Jumaane, a 21-year LAFD veteran now stationed at a midcity firehouse, filed suit in 2003, seeking more than $7 million. After deliberating a day, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury decided in favor of the city....

Jumaane, now 46, had claimed suspensions in 1999 and 2001 for poor job performance and violating department vehicle regulations were actually acts of retaliation for speaking out against racist depictions of African-Americans within the department.

But Deputy City Attorney Robert S. Brown argued that Jumaane's 1999 suspension came while he was an inspector and was found doing paperwork at the office rather than supervising brush clearance, and once failed to show up for work for a week without calling.

Apparently the court agreed with the city -- Jumaane got in trouble for his job performance, not for complaining about racism.

None of which is to downplay the various real and documented cases of discrimination in the LAFD. But clearly some opportunists have come to see the department's notorious reputation as an easy path to millions. By failing to police its own employees, the LAFD thus risks not only subjecting them to harassment, but itself to extortion.

In accepting his reappointment for five more years as chief of the LAPD, William Bratton remarked, "This is a city and a department we have come to love" -- which is pretty funny, given how much time he chooses to spend out of town.

Apparently absence really does make the heart grow fonder!

Jonathan raises the fair point that trying to determine who is fit -- or unfit -- to vote would be a risky process ripe for abuse. That said, we also get abuse now. When I was in college, I worked part-time in a home for mentally handicapped adults. One year, one of the supervisors drove all the residents to the polling station, and told them they had to all vote for Candidate A, because if Candidate B won, their group home would be shut down.

Still, I suppose I'm with Jonathan: I prefer the imperfect system we have now of letting all non-felon adults, competent or otherwise, vote, to a system in which the politicians themselves decide who's worthy. But let's not kid ourselves -- especially amidst all the breathless talk about electronic voting machines, etc. -- there will never be a flawless voting system, and there will always be abuses. (By both sides, too.)

More hair-raising revelations from Michelle Delgadillo's driving history in today's L.A. Times:

Los Angeles City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo's wife has an outstanding warrant for her arrest for failing to appear in court nearly nine years ago on charges of driving without insurance, with a suspended license and in an unregistered car, court records and officials confirmed Tuesday.

This saga has inspired me to tap my inner Weird Al, and come up with some new verses to the Beatles' classic, "Michelle":

Michelle, ma belle.
You are sweet tho you don't drive so well,
My Michelle.

Michelle, ma belle.
Vos voitures sont detruit, c'est terrible
C'est tres terrible.

I fear you, I fear you, I fear you.
No matter what road we're on,
When you're in the Yukon.

With all due respect to the Vatican's warm and fuzzy driving commandments, I have a list of my own which are more fitting for Southern California's incomparable driving experience:

1. You must not drive slow in the fast lane.
2. Secure the junk in the back of the truck. A stray ladder in the No. 3 lane can kill.
3. Don't violate the HOV by crossing the double yellow lines between the carpool land the rest of traffic.
4. Put the finger away. What would Jesus do if cut off? Probably not that.
5. Do not use your horn as a weapon.
6. Do not tailgate, unless they really, really deserve it.
7. Do not wait until the last minute to merge to that lane that's transitioning to another freeway so that you are forced to come to a stop and back up freeflowing traffic until you can get over. People who do this have a special corner of hell reserved for them.
8. Do not try to wash your windshield while at full speed on the freeway. Not only is it annoying to people behind you who get splatted, but it is dangerous to obscure your view for any length of time.
9. Do not throw your burning butts out the window. It is dangerous, illegal and incredibly ugly.
10. Do not take out your frustrations on other motorists. It is not their fault your life sucks.

OK, no complaining next time you don't get pretzels on an airplane flight. Your situation can't be anywhere near as bad as Collin Brock's. The Washington resident was on board Continental Airlines flight 1970 from Amsterdam to Newark last week when he "was forced to sit next to human excrement for seven hours." That's because, as the news story explains, "Passengers ... had to hold their noses for hours as sewage overflowed from toilets while they were high over the Atlantic."

Yikes. Sounds like the airline ought to change its name to Incontinental.

Thank you very much. (Click here here for rimshot.)

Lead letter from Wednesday's Daily News Your Opinion column:

Fox in the henhouse

Re "I'm sorry" (June 19):
Well, well, Rocky Delgadillo paid the money back. How big of him. I'm sure his conscience was bothering him - or maybe not. He just got caught. Did he pay for the gas used? I'm sure this was the first time. And this man is paid to do city business. And a GMC Yukon. How many of you can afford a Yukon? How many get free gas?
He and his wife should be in their cells next to Paris. You mean he did not know his wife had a suspended license? A lot of people are in prison who made "a mistake." As I see it, he lied, he cheated, and he stole.

- Allen Karpinski
Studio City

The Daily News opinion page this morning calls on L.A. City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's to turn in the keys to his city-paid car. Clearly, he and his wife are not to be trusted with city property.

Here's an excerpt:

The ultimate punishment that Rocky Delgadillo will receive for misusing his city SUV, lying about it and stealing from the public will likely be doled out on a future election. He's done more damage to his future career than his wife could ever inflict on his taxpayer-funded car.

Still, the city Ethics Commission may still devise some fitting fine or punishment. Meanwhile, Delgadillo should turn in his GMC Yukon - if for no other reason than to get it out of the hands of Michelle Delgadillo.

Not everyone is happy about Chief William Bratton getting another five-year term to lead the LAPD. In an op-ed column in the Daily News today, Xavier Hermosilla provides a litany of reasons why Chief Bratton didn't deserve to keep his job.

The great states of Maine and Rhode Island are in great states of turmoil pondering if the insane and demented ought to be able to vote. No. Really. I’m not making this up.

This is an issue that just begs for satire. I mean, it virtually writes itself, crying out for such cheap jokes as, “Why shouldn’t the insane and demented get to vote? After all, they obviously get elected.? This also begs for us to do polling in mental hospitals and see which candidates you’d, well, have to be crazy to vote for.

Cal State, UC, LACCD, LAUSD... all of these proud graduates are stepping on stages to receive their diplomas with much pomp and circumstance. So glad to see that al-Qaida got in the spirit of the season with their own suicide bomber training-camp graduation. There must have been a run on balloon bouquets and Class of 2007 teddy bears in Waziristan!

As Howard Stern said today on his Sirius show, "Did they get Bill Cosby to speak?"

This story gave me a new idea on how to fight al-Qaida from within: Enter the Delta Tau Chi pledge class...

Well, not exactly. But according to this report from E! News, FF's own Earl Ofari Hutchinson did try to meet with Paris Hilton -- or at least to give her a letter -- at her Lynwood jail on Sunday. Along with fellow members of the Los Angeles Civil Rights Association and Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable, EOH submitted a letter echoing a theme he has sounded here, that Hilton ought to speak out on behalf of female inmates:

Hilton, who has admitted to being "severely depressed" behind bars, needs to become "a poster girl for the mentally challenged," Hutchinson said.

I somehow suspect that's a title Paris won't be too eager to take on ...

Rosie O'Donnell is interested in replacing Bob Barker on CBS staple "The Price is Right." Intriguing. Can you imagine how that might play out? I have...

ANNOUNCER: Come on down, you're the next contestant on "The Price is Right"!

(Excited contestant, wearing an American flag T-shirt, runs down)

CONTESTANT: Hi Rosie!

ROSIE: What's with the shirt? Are you just here to rub your little brand of I'm-better-than-you patriotism in my face? I'll bet you voted for George Bush, didn't you? You think that being all proud of America justifies blowing up 1.2 million Iraqis? Did you ever think that the red on your little red, white and blue flag there represents the blood of the innocents from American imperialism? Like the 2 million Iraqis we've killed? Did that Hasselback broad send you??

* * *

ROSIE: OK, now you have to guess the price of this furniture set!

CONTESTANT #2: Umm... ummm.... $5,000!

ROSIE: What, do you think we're made of money? Do you think we'd endorse this nihilistic capitalistic system by featuring that fat-cat of a furniture set? We give them the publicity, you get the furniture, and they'll just probably turn around and give money to George W. Bush while millions of immigrants who are poor because of the Bush administration wait for the chance to make your chi-chi furniture!

* * *

ROSIE: Let's see what's behind the curtain!

CONTESTANT #3: Oh my God, it's a new car!!

ROSIE: That's right, we're giving you this gas-guzzler so you can fatten up the wallets of Big Oil as they rape the people of Iraq who were so much better under that dictator guy!

* * *

CONTESTANT #4: Cool, I get to play "Plinko"!

ROSIE: Who you calling a pinko? What kind of crazy right-wing fascist are you to call my social awareness communist? Did that Hasselback chick tell you to say that??

So Michael Bloomberg has bolted the GOP, a sign he may be considering a Ross Perot-like third-party bid for the presidency. Like Perot, he has mountains of cash to spend on his campaign. And like Perot, he could take votes away from the GOP -- although he's just as likely to steal votes away from the Democrats, too.

But there's a problem here.

Imagine an independent Bloomberg, running against Hillary for the Democrats and Rudy for the Republicans. See where we're headed? A three-way, all-New York race. (That is, if you can really call Clinton a New Yorker.) We'd also have three candidates who, despite differing bases and rhetoric, are actually not that far apart on most issues.

It's the political version of 57 channels and nothing on.

If Phil Spector is guilty of slaying Lana Clarkson, a lot of music industry feeders are guilty right along with him. Most of his biographies reveal a sick little fella who has been poking pistols in in people's faces for more than 30 years.

Spector was put on probation for a year in 1972 after pleading out to a misdemeanour of carrying a loaded firearm in a public place. He also pled guilty to a another misdemeanour of brandishing a firearm in a Beverly Hills hotel in 1975. That got him a stiff two years probation.

A string of music industry hustlers and celebrities got handguns stuffed in their faces. Hoping to do business off Spector or for whatever reasons, they did nothing about it. If they didn't want to call the cops on a sick dude, they could have had him committed for care. Do something, anything. But perhaps bizarre behavior is so common place in the field of pop music at the time that the incidences were no more than a good story to fascinate friends later.

Too bad Lana Clarkson isn't around to enjoy it.

L.A. Mayor Antonio V. apparently p-ed off NYC Mayor Bloomberg last night when he wasn't allowed as large a pro-him contingent at the Getty House's dinner because MAV had invited too many people to the party at his own house. It was tipped to the NY Post's gossip site apparently by a Bloomberg staffer. Oh, boo hoo. News to Bloomberg: When you are invited to dinner you should expect the host to dictate who the invitees are, not you.

Apparently, Bloomberg got over it enough to bask in the spotlight that follows the Governator and MAV around like white on rice, as you can see from the photo above.

The California Citizens Compensation Commission voted Monday to give 2.75 raises to state elected officials (except for Jerry Brown and Supe of Public Instruction, they get 5 percent raises). The new salaries range from governor at the top with $212,179 to the legislators at the bottom $116,208 . Don't cry for those poor legislators, though. Per diems add as much as $20,000 a year to their pay checks.

Looky here for a list of the new compensation levels

Names of the "citizen" commissioners after the jump. And by "citizen," they mean people who have benefitted from the state's political patronage system but aren't currently holding an elected position.

We're not talking chichis, but people who make spectacular public blunders and then compound them with even more spectacular blunders. That's a boob.

Today's word is in honor of Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo whose mishanding of his misuse of his city car was classic boobery.

After ducking questions for more than a week, City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo admitted Monday that his wife was behind the wheel of his city-assigned SUV and driving with a suspended license when she damaged it in an accident three years ago.

His voice cracking with emotion, Delgadillo said he made a mistake and should have been more open about the collision and repairs. Under city policy, family members of employees are not allowed to drive city-assigned vehicles.

Consumer confidence in the Golden State has sunk to Gray Davis levels:

Californians' consumer confidence in the economy took a dive in the second quarter of 2007, plunging into the pool of pessimism by 19 index points.

Economist Esmael Adibi called the drop "astonishing" - the steepest he's seen since 2002 when Chapman University's Gary Anderson Center for Economic Research of Orange County began sending surveys to California residents.

Pain at the pump, despite recent price drops. Uncertainty over the housing market. Sticker shock in grocery stores. Those are among the conditions Adibi cited for the cold-water splash.

When people lack confidence in the economy, they spend less, the economy cools further, and ... tax revenues tank. All of which makes Gov. Schwarzenegger's tenuous budget plans look all the more ... Gray.

The 10 Commandments for Driving from the Vatican are actually translated from a far older document. Tragically, they up-dated the original. Here it is without the up-dates.
1. When saddling ass, make sure it is four-legged variety.
2. Always yield to a Centurian.
3. Speeds of over 5 miles per hour are injurious to thy health and that of thine ass.
4. All roads do not lead to Rome, some go to that bawdy house at Brendisi, which thou knowest well.
5. Middle aged guys do not look younger ridding a sporty ass bedecked in red.
6. Hold thy temper and resist road rage. Remember what Oedipus did when he lost it at an intersection? He killed the other guy—who turned out to be his dad.
7. Cardinal Rule: Always yield to a Bishop.
8. Drink not of the red wine before mounting. A pleasant rosé might be okay.
9. Don’t let your young children ride your ass.
10. Always yield to someone dressed in silks, ermine and gold. Could be someone important or thy wife’s strange cousin Sidney.

Immigration opponents riff on a TV-commercial classic ...

The Vatican has released The Drivers' Ten Commandments -- a document desperately needed here in L.A., the the motorists' version of Sodom and Gomorrah. The commandments are:

1. You shall not kill.

2. The road shall be for you a means of communion between people and not of mortal harm.

3. Courtesy, uprightness and prudence will help you deal with unforeseen events.

4. Be charitable and help your neighbor in need, especially victims of accidents.

5. Cars shall not be for you an expression of power and domination, and an occasion of sin.

6. Charitably convince the young and not so young not to drive when they are not in a fitting condition to do so.

7. Support the families of accident victims.

8. Bring guilty motorists and their victims together, at the appropriate time, so that they can undergo the liberating experience of forgiveness.

9. On the road, protect the more vulnerable party.

10. Feel responsible toward others.

All in all a good list, although the translation to English leaves a little something to be desired. Anybody care to make any additions? I'll start with three:

11. Thou shall not apply make-up, talk on your cell phone, and eat a cheeseburger while trying to make a left-hand turn into four lanes of oncoming traffic.

12. Thou shall not drive 50 mph in the left lane.

13. Thou shall not scream at the motorist in front of you just because he or she had the good sense not to run that yellow light.

From Tuesday's Daily News Editorial Page

Burying the hatchet

Re Parks' crusade (Our Opinions, June 15):

You certainly did a hatchet job on former Chief Bernard Parks. Parks worked his way up in the Los Angeles Police Department and knows what some of the problems are. His criticism of Chief William Bratton along with others is certainly justified and should be addressed.

Chief Bratton's criticism of the MacArthur Park incident was deplorable. Here is a chief who wouldn't back up his own men and capitulated to the demonstrators. He no longer has the respect and backing of his officers and certainly does not merit being reappointed. Chiefs William Parker through Chief Daryl Gates were the pillars of the LAPD, and I'm proud of having served under them.

Retired LAPD detective

North Hills

Yes, the Iranian president has volunteered to serve as a human shield to keep the Natanz nuclear facilities from being attacked! When Mahmoud wakes up, of course:

Ahmadinejad said on Esfahan TV recently:

"If it helps you calm down, ask them just when they are planning to attack, and I myself will go to the people of Natanz, and we will sit down together in the nuclear facilities, and if they want to attack, they will have to attack us first."

Um, like that would actually keep anyone from attacking. "Don't fire -- you might hit Ahmadinejad!"

(Note & Confession: I wrote this, picked photo and put this up before crusing the site and seeing Birdgit Johnson's excellent piece--with virtually sdame photo--on same subject. Read hers!)

Salmon Rushdie is in trouble again, and the Muslim World is outraged. Leading Muslim scholars in Pakistan and Iran are calling for a renewal of the fatwa and death sentence given him 18 years ago. His crime then was his book, The Satanic Verses, which, they believed, portrayed Islam and the Prophet Mohammad in a bad light.

To our western sensibilities, ordering the execution of an author for religious reasons might seem to put Islam in a worse light than Rushdie’s novel. However, both Rushdie and Islam survived that crisis.

Now, however, the Queen of England has insulted Islam by recognizing Rushdie’s talent and accomplishments in the secular world. She has chosen to Knight the author. Religious authorities assure the devout that suicide bombing is justified to kill Sir Salmon.

This kind of attention is very bad for freedom of the press and a writer's peace of mind. It is however wonderful for book sales. Having bough The Satanic Verses 18 years ago and tried to wade through prose I found frankly turgid, I felt a bit cheated. Not so mad, however, as to have put out a contract on Sir Salmon.

Books beget death threats. Cartoons beget death threats. Going around unveiled, for a woman, beget, yes, death threats. Going around without a beard, for a man, beget, you guessed it, death threats.

There are habitually angry people who riot, issue death threats and burn flags (where do they get all the Israeli, American and English flags?). Everything makes them crabby. As a general rule if everything in the world is someone else’s fault and everything makes you go into a rage, you may have problems that are not about what you think they are about.

Having lived in the Muslim World very nicely, happily and been received with great generosity, I know that those radicals, those chronically offended, who speak in the name of Islam, do not represent Islam. They shame the generous hearts’ of the peaceful and compassionate.

Stuck in traffic? Unable to pull yourself away from all the Tivoed episodes of the Sopranos? If you missed the last Sherman Oaks Homeowners meeting no need to worry. Just check out the rocking NC video on YouTube. Up there now is a two exciting parts to Councilman Jack Weiss's recent visit with the SOHA. Yeehaw!

Bridget makes a good point about the limits of the anti-toy gun hysteria we see down in RPV. As a father of two boys, I've come to realize how absurd it would be to try to keep toy weapons out of my home, even if I wanted to.

If he had no toy weapons whatsoever, my three-year-old son would have no problem fashioning his own. Already, he fires his hand like a mock-pistol at unnamed "bad guys." He uses wooden spoons as "swords" with which he slays imaginary dragons. And even if we could somehow cut off his access to pretend weapons, that would not deter his enthusiasm for violence -- he loves tackling and wrestling anyone who will play along.

None of this bothers me, by the way. And yes, we let him play with toy weapons. (He bought a sword and shield from the dollar store, although he recently passed up a plastic gun in favor of a beach ball.) I'm not trying to raise a pacifist, I'm trying to raise a moral human being. And violence has a place in the moral order, namely, to protect the weak and innocent against the snares of the wicked. We authorize cops and soldiers, for example, to use violence to secure our rights, protect and our liberties and ensure the public order.

I'm not concerned about whether my son wants to play with toy weapons, but whether his play involves using them in the proper moral context. As long as his targets are "bad guys" and dragons, as long as he's pretending to be a soldier or a knight -- "I'm a good guy," he proudly boasts, "I protect people from bad guys!" -- then he's indulging natural boyhood fascinations in a way that's healthy and sound.

Blast away, kid.

Have you ever wondered how protesters, such as these Pakistanis PO'ed about Salman Rushdie's knighthood, get those flags so fast? No matter what the targeted country du jour, they always seem to have the appropriate banners at hand to torch and stomp upon. Like when the Danish publication Jyllands-Posten angered Muslims with the Muhammad cartoons: Suddenly, every corner of the Muslim world had a plentiful supply of Danish flags to barbecue. One of the most profitable jobs must be flag-seller -- watch your profits go up in smoke!

Speaking of Rushdie, Pakistan's religious affairs minister, Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, said that knighting Rushdie would justify suicide bombings against Britain:

"This is an occasion for the world's 1.5billion Muslims to look at the seriousness of this decision. ... If someone exploded a bomb on his body he would be right to do so, unless the British government apologises and withdraws the 'sir' title."

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the insanity that defines our world today. Simply writing a book not only garners a fatwa, but is twisted into justification for slaughtering others as well.

by Jonathan Dobrer

Juneteenth is an under-appreciated holiday that has been of special significance to Black Americans, but should be embraced by all of us. Juneteenth celebrates the freeing of American slaves in Texas on June 19th, 1865. Freedom is certainly worth celebrating, and we can all take some measure of comfort that slavery was finally officially abolished in 1865. That slavery had ever existed in America is a lasting embarrassment for which our entire society is still paying. Slavery is America’s Original Sin.

There is more to the story of Juneteenth than the Texas slaves being told they were free and no longer subject to being sold, separated from families and abused as if they were not fully human. There is the question of the gap.

President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation became law on January 1, 1863. That is when the slaves were freed. Somehow it took 18 months for the news to reach Texas. Even after Lee surrendered, it still took nearly six weeks before they slaves heard of their Emancipation.

At least some Texas slaveholders surely knew of the surrender, but still didn’t want to let their slaves go free.

The greater point is the gap that exists for all of us between what the facts are and when we really “get” the news. Sometimes the issues are trivial but when it is a question of freedom, time is of the essence.

When I was little, my mother took away the inch-long toy guns from all of our Star Wars figures in a move intended to promote nonviolence (which left Greedo, Boba Fett and others resigned to going mano a mano or doing battle with harsh language).

And apparently I grew up to be a big warmonger, so goes to show how the far the pint-size armament ban went.

The toy soldier ban in Palos Verdes reported by Chris is another in a long line of absurd bureaucratic cop-outs. I know that there have been elementary school children suspended for drawing pictures of guns. Can you imagine?

The artist Rene Magritte’s famous picture shows a painting of a pipe, and on the canvass is written in French, “This is not a pipe.” Seems pretty clear that it’s a picture of a pipe and not a real pipe. Trying to light up and smoke the canvas would not be a good idea. Most 5 year-olds get it.

Sadly, zero tolerance normally implies zero sense, judgment or responsibility. The not doubt well-meaning people at the Palos Verdes schools don’t have the sense of a 5 year-old and can’t distinguish a toy soldier from an armed terrorist.

Maybe written over the annual portrait of the PV school officials should be the words: “These are not educators.”

Five days later and everyone's still piling on the Governator for the ill-advised but genuine suggestion to turn off the TV in response to a reporter's question about how to improve exit exam pass rates among Spanish speakers. To recap, Arnold said they should turn off the Spanish-language television shows and put down the Spanish Language TV and turn on Three's Company and pick up the Daily News.

The latest person to use this for his own self-serving purposes is Phil Angelides, the millionaire grandson of Greek immigrants who is still quite sour about losing out last year to some teutonic meathead. In a e-mailed letters to newspaper editors, Angelides chides the Austrian-born Arnold for being mean, or something and for the "slap down" to immigrants. (Click here to read the PDF.)

The real question is not if Phil's right (he's not) , it's what office is he running for now.

Regardless of the larger issues of immigration, assimilation and heaving breasts on "La Eslava Isaura," Arnold's absolutely right, if not very delicate about it. And everyone knows it. Now, can we all just stop yapping about his non-issue and start worry about what the real meatheads in Washington are not doing about immigration?

from Monday's Daily News
No new car-pool lanes
Re "On the road alone in L.A." (June 14):

Your front-page story in Thursday's paper clearly illustrates the sheer folly of continuing to build car-pool lanes. I have said for many years car-pool lanes have never done what they were intended to do in Southern California. Your article supports this view.
The original intent was good. It was to encourage drivers to double up, removing many cars from the freeway. It has never happened. And now we have a master plan to widen the 405, seizing by eminent domain some 31 properties in the process. I say this is madness. I agree we obviously need to do something about gridlock, especially on the 405. However, another car-pool lane is not the answer.

At least that's what school officials in Rancho Palos Verdes think about these toy Army men, according to the Daily Breeze's report:

A fifth-grade promotion ceremony in Rancho Palos Verdes turned into a free-speech battleground Thursday, when students were asked to remove weapons from toys that had been placed on mortarboard caps because of the school's zero-tolerance policy for weapons on campus. Each year, students decorate wide caps with princesses, football goal posts, zebras, guitars and other items to express their personalities and career goals. ...

On Thursday, before the ceremony, one boy was told he couldn't participate unless he agreed to clip off the tips of the plastic guns carried by the minuscule GIs on his cap.

Come on kid, inch-high homages to our soldiers in battle have no place in a public school! Put something on your mortarboard that your elementary-school officials may consider more appropriate ... like condoms.

Today's opinion page features an op-ed from former LAUSD Superintendent Roy Romer, who -- with the help of $60 million from Bill Gates and Eli Broad -- is heading up a group that seeks to make education a top issue in the 2008 presidential campaign. All of which is fine and dandy, but it's humorous to see ol' Roy fulminating about America's high-school dropout crisis:

According to the latest "Diplomas Count" report by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, more than 1.2 million students are dropouts. America's high-school graduation rate has slipped behind 18 other countries, and America's share of the world's college graduates has shrunk by half. Unless there is a dramatic shift, more than 12 million students will drop out nationwide over the next decade, resulting in a $3 trillion blow to our nation's economy. ...

America's education crisis will plague every family as income gaps widen and the economic security of our country is threatened.

Why, it's almost as though Romer forgets that he used to head up the nation's second-largest school district, which has the country's sixth-worst dropout rate. And during that time, when Romer was consumed with building new schools, the district did precious little about its dropout problem -- except argue about the numbers.

We could have used this kind of concern a few years earlier ...

Since Hamas seized control of Gaza and is continuing to make a big disaster of things there, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas canned Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, outlawed Hamas militants, formed an emergency government, and concentrated on keeping the West Bank in one sane piece. Hamas whined that the move was illegal and tried to boost their P.R. by telling half-truths about their efforts to free BBC correspondent Alan Johnston from al-Qaida-linked forces.

Now, the U.S. is set to lift the embargo against the Palestinian government. Abbas will work with the Israeli government instead of trying to annihilate them. Gaza will continue to be poor, festering, violent, and more concerned with jihad than civil services. The West Bank will be able to flaunt its foreign aid at the Hamas Strip.

The big problem? Even more terrorist growth in Gaza, supported by Syria and Iran. Unchecked insanity. Time for a bold move -- like Abbas and Ehud Olmert uniting to strike Gaza.

China is crowing about the fact that 84 rare Siberian tigers have been born in captivity since March at a breeding center in the country's northeast Heilongjiang province. China also plans to "establish a gene bank for the endangered Siberian tigers within three years to ensure heredity diversity of the big cats" and release 620 of the tigers into the wild.

Surely before that point the Communist government will think it wise to implement a one-cub policy. After all, you can't have unchecked cub births being a strain on the country. Of course, this could lead to female cubs being killed in favor of males, and then you'll have a big lopsided male tiger population. Punitive sanctions, forced abortions, and general inhumanity could enforce this policy.

Of course, China may be content to treat tigers better than their people -- until, perhaps, they realize that Chinese women are becoming a rare species, as well.

The Italian designer died of a brain hemorrhage today. He was 62.

Our society quickly mourns the newsmakers, the political and religious movers and shakers, writers and orators who left tangible impacts on the world. But there's always a sense of loss for those like Ferre, who simply left the world a more beautiful, colorful, vibrant place by using his talents to the fullest.

Just look at Khomeini! (Who is dead, of course, but always looked mad, so fits this story well; as well as the fact that the ayatollah issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie in 1989 for "The Satanic Verses.")

The Iranian government's response to Rushdie being knighted for his contributions to literature:

"Honouring and commending an apostate and hated figure will definitely put the British officials [in a position] of confrontation with Islamic societies. This act shows that insulting Islamic sacred [values] is not accidental. It is planned, organised, guided and supported by some Western countries."

This, of course, after Iran held a bunch of British sailors hostage and paraded them on TV in cheap suits, has been arming Iraq militants, has been arming the Taliban, is working on the destruction of Israel, is fast-forward on its "peaceful" nuclear program, and is basically doing its best to screw up any part of the world it can get its hands on.

And how could they not have enjoyed Rushdie's great cameo in "Bridget Jones's Diary"?

Jonathan makes excellent points. But without ski masks, what would al-Qaida news anchors wear on As-Sahab?

I wonder what Dan Rather has to say about this guy's anchor skills...

In a great breakthrough for peace, or perhaps a fashion statement, Hamas has banned ski masks. This is supposed to cut down on masked Muslims cutting each other down with automatic weapons. In its wisdom (sic.) Hamas has carved out an exception: Masks may be worn when shooting at Israelis.

In the immortal words of Andy Rooney, “Did you ever wonder…” Did you ever wonder where all these ski masks come from? I mean, who got the idea to bring thousands of ski masks to the Middle East? Given the absence of snow skiing opportunities in Gaza, I would think that anyone buying a ski mask is up to something nefarious. Like arms dealers, they must know that the end use is not recreational.

Maybe the way to peace is to ban the sale of ski masks totally. First step is to register all existing masks, then restrict their sale to proven killers of Israelis only. Finally, when peace is at hand and all the Israelis and non-conforming Muslims are dead, all the masks will be collected, burned and peace will reign for generations. Instead of disarmament, we'll have demastification.

Since Hamas members are no longer permitted to wear masks when killing fellow Muslims, Israelis may quickly go after any masked Muslims. As usual this is a Hamas policy not clearly thought through. But what else is new?

My apologies, Chris, for supplanting the photo of your cute tykes with a picture of a Hamas jihadist, but I had to seize the perfect opportunity for a Caption This. For those of you new to the blogosphere, Caption This is an interactive exercise where readers (and co-bloggers!) tell us what's really going on in the picture:

The first thing that sprang to my mind? "MSN outsources its customer help line to Gaza"

Have at it!

This Father's Day weekend, we''ll hear a lot about how wonderful and important dads are, which is great. But as the very blessed father of these three cuties above, all I can say is, don't overdo it on the thanking. Yes, we appreciate your gratitude, but no, this isn't some arduous burden we take on heroically. Fatherhood is beautifully transformative, incredibly challenging and at times maddeningly hard, but a true joy, in the truest sense of the word. Any thanks I get I want to redirect toward God, who put these amazing little people in my life; to my wife, from whom they derive their sweetness; and to the three amazing little people themselves, whom I love more than I ever thought imaginable.

When my wife and I learned we were expecting our first, a wise friend (and dad) said, "People will tell you this will change your life, which it will, but what they don't say is that kids make you laugh every day."

And they do. Every hour, really. In children there is an innocence, a sweetness that reminds us of how life is really meant to be lived -- with excitement, wonder and awe. My kids get the biggest kick out of the simplest things, be it washing the car, taking out the trash or eating popcorn. Their young perspective reminds me to take nothing for granted, and to look for the good in all things.

There's a reason why Scripture tells us we must be like a child to enter the Kingdom of God, and that's because children are endowed with a sense of faith and trust that we, the hardened and cynical adults, spend decades trying to re-find. But my kids help me to re-find it. Every day. I love being a dad.

Happy Father's Day to all the dads out there!

Behold, Patrick O'Connor's color cartoon from Sunday's paper -- a sneak preview for FF readers.

Nah, he just now needs a chunk of his friggin' lung removed!

And yes, I'm still irked by Andrew Speaker's selfishness in exposing others to his disease through his worldwide hop, then going on TV and whining and blaming everybody else for his actions. And have they even figured out yet how Mr. Personal Injury Lawyer contracted the extremely drug-resistant strain? Ick.

I've been amazed at some of the hostile reactions I've received to my Tuesday post about extremists on both sides of the immigration debate. (The item also was adapted for and published in Wednesday's Daily News.) Below are some highlights from a long, rambling, and angry letter that denounces everything I said, while at the same time inadvertently confirming my observations:

You seem to equate the militant Mexican/Reconquistas/Brown berets to people (Americans) who believe that their nation should be able to, like every other country, enforce its soverignty and borders.

I never said that all restrictionists are like the reconquistas, only some. Why is that point so hard for some folks to understand?

You have no respect for Americans who are concerned with 1) People who break the law and demand the taxpayers to subsidize them by putting them on various welfare programs including paid-for section 8 housing, booting out the needy American citizens.

Um, no. I said, "most immigration restrictionists bring very practical, reasonable concerns -- not xenophobia or racism -- to the debate." But among their ranks there is also a fair amount of ignorance and hatred.

2) The destruction of our once-proud school system being flooded by illegal aliens and their anchor babies who are illiterate in any language ...

6) 1 out of every 10 Mexicans now resides in the U.S. Many, if not most, remain loyal to their Mother Mexico, and detest and resent the Yankee culture. They merely want to remake our nation in their former home's image. They resent having to learn English, don't want their children to learn it, and demand that all government services be given in Spanish ...

See, here's the problem: Once you've made the blanket statement that members of an entire nationality are "illiterate in any language," it's hard to make the case that there's no bigotry in your ranks. And when you say that most Latino immigrants "detest and resent Yankee culture," you're indicating that you've never dealt with many personally, and/or you've allowed the wackos on the other side of the debate to shape your perspective of them.

This is precisely what I was writing about when I wrote: "For the nativists, the reconquistas justify their nativism -- see, the Mexicans hate us and want to take us over! ... Politically disinterested Anglos and Latinos alike -- who want nothing to do with this whole debate, and just want to raise their families well -- can be frightened by the extremist language into adopting more radical positions of their own. ('I've got nothing against them, but so many of them seem to have something against us!')"

Anyway, I don't understand the defensiveness. There is no cause so pure, so good, that it's incapable of attracting creeps. And in the immigration debate, the creeps are out in abundance.

PS -- I've posted the entire message after the jump. Despite the overheated rhetoric, the author raises some fair questions. Too bad he undermines his own case through his own vitriol.

First of all, I'm not buying this study too much. I've always voted GOP, and after hours of being in front of a computer, commuting or running around at events all day, it's nice to plop in front of the TV for a little bit when I can squeeze it in. When I wake up, first thing I do is turn on the news. Before I go to bed, I check the news again. When you're deluged with reading and writing news all day long, it's nice to just escape once in a while with some occasionally mindless TV: my favorites include "Sex and the City," "The Tudors," "South Park," those VH-1 countdowns of the worst songs, etc., and VH-1's "Behind the Music," History Channel fare, and reality shows including "American Idol" and the highly amusing "The Girls Next Door." (I even met a conservative book editor last year who once wrote a column on why "Sex and the City" is really a conservative show, and having seen every episode umteen times I concurred with her points.)

Now from Carrie's Manolo Blahniks to Michael Medved's Townhall piece: Medved's a personable guy; a couple years back I gave him a ride from the airport and he was nice enough to chat with my mom (a huge fan) on my cell phone as we cruised up LaCienega toward a film festival. But paragraphs like this:

"Either way, the isolation associated with hours and hours in front of the tube leads to liberal values and viewpoints. In every election, single people prove vastly more likely to vote for Democrats than do married people: Republican Presidential candidates have won majorities of married voters even in elections where Democrats proved victorious overall (as with Bob Dole’s ill-starred race in 1996).

People who see themselves as alone in the world, with no network of spouses or fellow congregants, frequently turn to government as a source of support and comfort—just as they’d turn to television as a source of phony companionship. It makes sense that loneliness and helplessness and disconnection would breed both liberalism and heavy TV viewing; just as a vibrant family life, and communal participation, would produce less television and more conservative self-reliance."

That's just uncalled for. When will single people, divorced people, people without families (but who still happen to have values!), stop being the punching bag of conservatives who engage in the "my family is better than yours" arrogance? I ask this as a political conservative. Why is the wisdom of believing that first comes love, then comes marriage -- and not getting hitched just to be married and reproduce -- written off as loneliness and helplessness, rather than acknowledging that unmarried people add just as much to society as couples having kids? It gets really tiresome. This is a big reason why, when asked to describe my conservatism, I swing toward the libertarian-tinged conservatism described in my friend Brian Anderson's book "South Park Conservatives" (that, and I don't believe F-bombs in movies spell the end of humanity).

Medved continues:

"Wholesome stories (in the dated style of 'Leave it Beaver' or 'Father Knows Best') have gone out of fashion not because they don’t exist anymore (most of us actually live such stories) but because the desperate competition for viewer attention (among literally hundreds of cable channels, video games, DVD’s, and networks) promotes a bias for the bizarre. This in turn connects to a sense that the world’s gone mad, and requires some sort of radical (usually leftist governmental initiative to avert looming apocalypse."

Most people have "Leave it to Beaver" families? Now that's just wishful thinking!!

Friendly Fire's own Earl Ofari Hutchinson was on "Newshour" last night, talking about Mayor Villaraigosa and the the increasingly political clout of Latinos in the U.S. Here's the money quote. courtesy of EOH:

When a mayor meddles in education, brings politics and politicizes the education process, we're in trouble.

You can read, listen to, or watch the whole thing here.

The Paris Hilton imbroglio is not about Ms. Hilton. If it were neither Earl Ofari Hutchinson nor I would be writing about. Mr. Hutchinson got it right that Sheriff Baca didn’t do anything out of the ordinary in granting her early release. The great question is if Baca’s ordinary process and procedure is legal.

We have three branches of government—the executive, legislative and judicial—and they regularly contend with each other in a kind of dynamic tension. This is as it should be. Added to the three constitutional branches, we like to think of the press as the fourth estate—an overseer and process observer.

Sheriff Baca’s early release process introduces himself as another player that is extra-constitutional. The court, legislature or executive may delegate certain duties and rights, they may constitute parole boards, but where is it written that the Sheriff or Chief of Police can act as judge, jury and parole board all at once? Where is the process that insures due process for those sent to jail?

Though he may have acted with Ms. Hilton in a way consistent with past practice, what assurances does the public have, in the absence of a legally authorized series of checks and balances, that all will be treated fairly? It is almost always true that a benign despot offers efficiency, but the historic question has been how to assure continued benevolence?

There is a far deeper legal issue here and that is if the Sheriff must obey the court? It is one thing to regularly release prisoners early, and it is quite another to ignore the specific terms, signed into the sentence by the judge that forbad him from granting release at 10% of sentence and specifically enjoined the Sheriff from granting home release—even monitored. Can the sheriff ignore a court order?

If Sheriff Baca had a problem with the conditions of the sentence, the proper procedure would have been to take it to the judge or to take it up to the appellate level. Ignoring judges is a bad idea for Baca, but more importantly, it is a bad idea for our system of justice.

Well, not me, actually, but this gal does:

Actual lyric: "You can Barack me tonight." E-gads. And people wonder why middle America votes Republican ...

Earl Ofari Hutchinson

L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca vehemently says that there was absolutely no favoritism in granting Paris Hilton an early release. Despite the furious torrent of catcalls, name-calling, and finger pointing at the sheriff not to mention a recall petition and a demand by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors for him to explain his action, Baca hasn’t budged an inch from his claim that the heiress got no special treatment. And he shouldn’t, because he’s right. Hilton didn’t get any special treatment.

Halle Berry, who’s African-American, was slapped with a misdemeanor charge for her hit and run accident that resulted in bodily injury to the other driver. She served no jail time. Actress Michelle Rodriguez, who’s Latina, got a 60-day jail sentence for DUI. She served two days less than Hilton.

One can quibble whether the sex pot heiress socialite faked her mental anguish to worm out of punishment, but that doesn’t change the fact that Baca has released thousands of prisoners from the L.A. County Jail, and the Board of Supervisors have barely uttered a peep of protest about it. They really can’t because they’re boxed in a corner. They can try to scrounge up millions more from their cash strapped budget for a crash jail building and expansion program, radically increase funding for drug and diversion programs, or send a tacit signal to the Sheriff’s and the LAPD to arrest thousands fewer offenders. Voters and taxpayers would scream bloody murder at the mere mention of doing any of these.

Whether Hilton’s psychological trauma is a bad case of Hiltonitis, meaning she faked it, or she really was in mental shambles at the horror of jail, is pointless to debate. She can’t get the kind of quality psychological care and treatment at the jail she needs. And neither can thousands of others that are warehoused in the jail that suffer acute and chronic mental ailments. Many of them, as Hilton, are non-violent, first time offenders and they were granted early release with no public fanfare or outcry about it.

An ACLU lawsuit, a federal court ruling, a federal consent decree, two studies, and countless protests by mental health reform advocates in the past few years have fingered the County’s pathetically understaffed and under-funded mental and medical health services. Baca has repeatedly shouted for upwards of $300 million more to revamp the L.A. County jail system predictable. Presumably, a part of that money would go to upgrade medical and mental health services at the jail. Baca has said that the supervisors and taxpayers are going to have to bite the dollar bullet and spend big to improve the jails. If that ever happened, it would momentarily eliminate the need for Baca to pick and choose which prisoners get released early and which ones languish behind bars.

The hard truth is that the prison riots, the dumping thousands of prisoners back on the streets, prisoner lawsuits, draconian budget slashes, and gross overcrowding have made the L.A. County jails the nation’s poster jail system for jail dysfunctionality. The jail mess has kept Baca and the supervisors squarely on the hot seat. Thus the sheriff’s relentless answer that the supervisors and the taxpayers cough up more money to hire more deputies, and expand the number of cells.
The overcrowding that plagues county jails is hardly exclusive to L.A. According to the Bureau of Justice figures, 650,000 persons are locked up every day in America’s jails. And more than 10 million are incarcerated every year. This has forced legislators and courts in other states to scramble madly to find more money for prisons or follow L.A. County’s example and shove more prisoners out the gates early.

Long before the Hilton furor, Baca took much heat for the early prisoner release program, and that’s also unfair. A much closer look at those released show that most were jailed for non-violent, misdemeanor offenses. That’s not to say that some of them didn’t pose a potential threat to public safety, but the reality is that it’s either release them or risk more inmate turmoil, lawsuits, and federal tampering with the jails. It’s not the choice that Baca, and the supervisors want to make. And it’s a choice that they wouldn’t have to make if they’d aggressively implement the reform programs that other cities and states are using used to help people turn their lives around. For a brief time that included California state prison officials.

The Hilton affair was a no-win for Baca. If he let her out early, as he has done with other non-violent, first time offenders, who served a fraction of their time, he’d be crucified by the public. As he has been. If he made her serve more of her sentence than other low level offenders that got early release he’d be crucified by her attorneys, Hilton family members, and maybe even some in the press. As it now stands, they’ve all nailed him to their cross.

Hilton is and continues to be a political football for anyone with an ax to grind and a hidden agenda about Baca, Hilton, the rich and famous, or the jail system. But Baca has nothing to be ashamed of. He got it right about Hilton. Unfortunately, the public hasn’t got it right about him or her.

... your hear a politician say that he or she "didn't get into public service for the money," just remember that Bill Clinton earned $10 million last year. Politicians do fine when in office, but it's when they're out of office is that they really cash in.

Speaking at a National Association of Hispanic Journalists conference today -- a conference attended by our very own Mariel Garza -- Gov. Schwarzenegger gave Latino immigrants some frank advice: Turn off the Spanish-language media, and learn English.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told hundreds of Latino journalists Wednesday that immigrants who want to learn English more quickly should shun various forms of Spanish-language media.

"You've got to turn off the Spanish television set," Schwarzenegger said at the 25th annual National Association of Hispanic Journalists convention, which included many who produce Spanish-language material.

"It's that simple. You've got to learn English."

These are the sort of comments that can get politicians into hot water, but Arnold knows whereof he speaks:

"I know this sounds odd and this is the politically incorrect thing to say and I'm going to get myself in trouble. But I know that when I came to this country, I very rarely spoke German to anyone." ...

Schwarzenegger last year angered some Latino leaders by observing that Mexican immigrants have problems succeeding in the United States because "they try to stay Mexican." He hammered at the same point Wednesday in San Jose, saying that immigrants from Germany or France have an easier time learning English because they do not have many outlets to speak their native tongues.

"You're just forced to speak English, and that just makes you learn the language faster," Schwarzenegger said. "It is much more difficult and much more challenging when you are ... let's say, Latino. Because you have so many Latinos, as I see at the Capitol in Sacramento, there are so many Latinos who speak Spanish all the time, they speak to each other in Spanish. So it makes it difficult to perfect their English skills as quickly as possible."

This may prove to be controversial, but I really can't see why. The best way to succeed in the U.S. is to learn English, and the best way to learn a language is to immerse oneself in it. That was certainly the experience of my father -- himself also (coincidentally) an Austrian immigrant.

The poet wrote, “What a gift it would be to see ourselves as others see us.” Well Chris looked into his mirror and apparently saw me! Nailed me, yes guilty as hell, and sick as the devil with Pundit’s Disease.

I confess: My name is Jonathan, and I am a pundit. I can no longer live in denial, but am not yet in recovery.

I may have been born with this tendency—a genetic predisposition, and then had it triggered by growing up in a very political and liberal household. My parents discussed politics, current events and literature. They even paused long enough to listen appreciatively (or at least to pretend to be listening and appreciative) to my brother and me. This clearly emboldened us—and me in particular.

Then I fell into bad company in high school. How many sad tales and sorry excuses begin with this sentence. I joined the forensic team and did debate, extemporaneous speaking and impromptu competitions. Tragically, I excelled, fooled judges and won competitions.

From there it was all downhill to that hitting bottom experience of waking up with the delusion that our great American Constitution and Bill of Rights included the specific right for everyone to know my every thought and opinion.

Dear Gentle Readers, Co-Conspirators and Enablers: Forgive me my trespasses as I prepare to trespass again.

Our colleagues at The Sausage Factory call to our attention a Time Magazine story "about new BFFs Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg." According to the article, billionaire Warren Buffett dreams about the two forming a presidential campaign ticket:

Buffett thinks it's a great idea, and when he first heard it, he turned to the Constitution. "I wanted to see if Schwarzenegger could be his Vice President," Buffett said. "I think he could." It states that the President must be native born, but it's silent on the Vice President.

Buffett may be a financial genius, and he makes more each day than I've made in my life, but he (and Time) got it wrong on the Constitution. See the last sentence of Amendment XII:

... no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

If Arnold wants a role in the White House, it will have to be at the Cabinet level, a la Henry Kissinger.

Daily News regular Steve Young has written an interesting column about an affliction that spreads like wildfire among those of us in the opinion-making business -- Smartest Person in the Room Disorder (or SPIRD):

It's a baffling psychosomatic disorder because being the smartest person in the room doesn't mean that you're actually the smartest person in the room. Only that you believe you are. It's not so much about being smart as feeling you're always right.

SPIRD symptoms include, but are not limited to: thinking you have all the answers; thinking you should know all the answers; bulging forehead blood vessels; a compulsion not only to shout down your adversaries, but finally to demonize or ruin them.

I must plead guilty to wrestling with this disorder and some of its symptoms at various points over the years, and I'm sure I'm not alone. If you're someone whose job or hobby is to publicly declare opinions -- whether in print, on the web, on the radio or even at the dinner table -- then, by definition, you're someone with opinions. More to the point, you're someone with reasonable confidence in your opinions, otherwise you'd be more inclined to keep them to yourself.

But how does one write, or talk, about deeply held beliefs in a way that is confident but not arrogant? How does one effectively make the case for one's beliefs while still maintaining a sense of humility, i.e., "Take this all with a grain of salt, because I'm just some schmo and I very well could be wrong"?

I ask the question because I truly don't know the answer -- a sign, I suppose, that for this moment, anyway, I've got my SPIRD under check. I also have had the experience of being tragically, spectacularly wrong, and that will do plenty to temper one's sense of intellectual superiority.

I suppose that we are each presented with unique temptations in life tailored to our state and temperament. The accountant, given his position, may especially feel the lure to embezzle; the rock star to philander; the salesman to lie. For the editorialist, the temptation is intellectual vanity.

For all the times I've acted like a know-it-all jerk -- past and, sigh, probably future -- my apologies.

Jonathan's mention of Fred Thompson's young wife reminded me of the first time I'd heard about Fred Thompson's young wife: yesterday, in the loo at the Four Seasons. Two women in their 50s were talking, and one said that Thompson couldn't appear anywhere with the "young wife whose t*ts are always hanging out."

Giuliani gets criticized for having had three wives. Thompson gets criticized for having a wife with breasts. Heavens to Betsy, when will it stop?!?

Jonathan Dobrer finds Fred Thompson formidable, and the markets seem to agree.

The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled unanimously that states can require unions to get the permission of their members before spending money on political causes. This is, you will recall, the very issue behind Prop. 75 on the 2005 special-election ballot .... which public-employee unions (successfully) spent a fortune to kill.

On the radio this morning, it seemed that wherever I turned on the dial, I heard the quote from L.A. Sheriff's Department flak Steve Whitmore, informing us that Paris Hilton's "condition is stable."

You don't say!

Call me a cynic, but has anyone seriously doubted Hilton's physical health -- anyone, that is, not named Lee Baca or Steve Whitmore?

Just because a judge forced Baca to put Hilton back in jail doesn't mean that the special treatment has ended. Today's Daily News story reports that at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility, she was kept in "hospital" conditions (clean sheets and clothes every day, which the rest of the inmates don't get), with rumors of an expanded menu to suit her more discerning palate. And now that she's being transferred back to Lynwood, she will still remain in a special medical unit until we can make sure she really, really, is fit as a fiddle.

Baca and Whitmore's protestations to the contrary, it does not seem like Paris is getting treated like any other inmate. The seeming dishonesty here, even more than the double standard, is what fuels the public outrage leading to sites like this.

“Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.” Euripides wrote this around 2,400 years ago, and it’s still both true and pertinent.

All in the punditocracy are just itching for the already large herd of presidential candidates to grow by at least two more Alpha Bulls to add to the, uh, bull. The media keep reporting the relative dissatisfaction that Republicans feel towards the present candidates, whose conservative bona fides they suspect as being counterfeit. Gee, I wonder why one would be suspicious of Mitt? If Kerry was the Massachusetts flip-flopper, Mitt is the Mass Whirling Dervish, changing core positions to suit the time and audience. The Democrats say they’re content but the media aren’t. It’s just too early for the race to end, and it would be so much more fun for a couple of stars to shine up the dull line-up.

The truth is that the debates have shown that there are only a few serious candidates for the two nominations—and no one really has caught fire with either party. On the Democratic side, Bill Richardson is running for VP and Joe Biden for Secretary of State. Only Hillary, Edwards and Obama are really contending. On the Republican side none of the second tier candidates will top Rudy, McCain or Mitt.

I’m not sure the political parties are desperately looking for a couple of white knights but the media sure are. The media gods are making mad with hope the already ambitious Fred Thompson and Al Gore. We are unfairly tempting them with prospects of easy victories and heroic welcomes. All that is missing are the flowers. Well, there should be plenty of flowers that were not used to greet American soldiers in Iraq, because they will get the same welcome from us.

The sudden media love affair with Gore, I suspect, is partially out of guilt for having made him look ridiculous in 2000. (Not that Gore wasn’t complicit in his own downfall with a different persona for each debate). Now, however, that he is an OSCAR winner, an authentic author and is being considered for the Noble Prize, he is becoming iconic.

Fred Thompson is also promised a nice amble to the nomination. He is a credible conservative in a field seemingly lacking charismatic and authentic conservatives. This I find a bit strange since Mike Huckabee is charismatic in both the theatrical and the religious meanings of the word and is a genuine conservative. He will be the VP candidate. Thompson has that intangible but important gravitas; he seems presidential and that drawl makes him at once powerful and charming. Truly a potent combination.

Once we succeed in luring Al and Fred in the fun really begins. We get over our infatuation and the negatives come out. There’s Fred’s lymphoma (as against McCain’s melanoma?!). There’s Fred’s YOUNG wife. There’s the fact that Fred was both a lawyer and a lobbyist. The only thing worse would be if he owned an HMO. Already the op-research folks are questioning his work habits. Hmmm an actor who is said to work less than full time? It worked for Reagan.

As for Gore, we will fall out of love with him as soon as he rambles on in that schoolmarmish drone of his. Gore well knows what Hillary’s op-research people are willing to do and I do not believe he will take her on. For him to come in, she would have to have made a fatal political gaff.

It’s a shame we won’t get to kick Al around again. But Fred? Well, I can’t wait.

As the media gods enhance their iconic status, remember that better livings are made by iconoclasts than by icon makers.

Yesterday I headed over to the Four Seasons for the Wednesday Morning Club luncheon featuring talk-show host Hugh Hewitt -- the first time I've attended a WMC event that was actually held on a Wednesday! I joined my good friend Holly Strom there -- Holly and her husband Joel Strom are truly salt-of-the-earth Angelenos; Joel has spent oodles of time at his Beverly Hills dental practice giving free dental care to World War II vets. Sitting to my left during the lunch was Luke Ford, who announced back in January on his blog that Antonio Villaraigosa's marriage was "kaput."

Hewitt's speech was interesting. He asked for a show of hands in the room for McCain supporters (none), Giuliani supporters (about 60%), Romney supporters (about 30%), and Thompson backers (about 10%). Because we L.A. Republicans are continually beat over the head with the fact that we're not flyover country, Hewitt was quick to note that the numbers wouldn't be reflected in other parts of the country. He predicted a Clinton-Obama ticket on the Dems' side, and said he could see either a Giuliani-Romney or Romney-Giuliani ticket. He declared McCain to be like the parrot in Monty Python's parrot sketch. He predicted that if Romney gets the nomination, the left will go after the former Massachusetts governor's Mormonism like a pack of pit bulls. And if Giuliani gets the nod, there ain't much more in his closet to dredge up. He thinks that Fred Thompson's lymphoma is a problem; if it relapses after he got the nod, the GOP would be dead in the water. Hewitt predicted that the winner of Campaign 2008 will be the candidate who understands new media the best. And Newt? No chance.

The oddest moment of day? As I was leaving the valet parking area, turning onto Doheny, a paparazzo snapped my picture, setting him up for a good clobbering from editors who were expecting tipsy Lindsay Lohan at 1:15 p.m. But Holly encouraged me to snap a pic of the adorable dessert served at the lunch, which was some sort of gingerbread creamy puff (in a rich-people portion guaranteed not to pack on the pounds!):

I just got a preview as "Die Hard 2" was on the Fox Movie Channel. Fred Thompson was some official at Dulles Airport as some terrorists were threatening planes. One of the terrorists called Thompson and revealed his nefarious plans.

FRED (aghast): You can't do this!

TERRORIST (melodramatically sinister): I am doing it!

I wonder if John McClane can run for president. Maybe "Live Free or Die Hard" will really be a campaign announcement. Yippee-ki-yay, al-Qaida...

Does TV make us dumb, and if so, does being dumb cause us to become liberal? These are the questions implicit in Michael Medved’s interpretation of the correlation between time spent watching TV and being liberal or conservative. The more time in front of what he specifically, and not carelessly, refers to as “the idiot box,” clearly, in his view makes us idiots and therefore liberals.

This is an interesting theory, but he gives away his own bias. A study of TV habits undifferentiated by topic or form and only distinguished by time isn’t very useful. Are you watching PBS or Fox? Are you watching Jeopardy or World Wrestling? I cannot take seriously a study that doesn’t seem to sort by content.

More and more, we choose our stations and content. We self-select Fox, PBS, Oxygen or Nashville. We share common experiences far less frequently than before. The demographics for the late West Wing were different from Jeff Foxworthy. Perhaps the exception that brings us together was Sopranos, the ending being a shared cultural moment. Otherwise we sort out by demographic and our choices, I suspect, reflect our politics rather than causing us to take new positions.

I know there is supposed to be a liberal bias on TV and particularly in the news. While it is true that more writers are liberal than conservative, the same cannot be said about producers—who are chiefly interested in capturing the eyeballs in the heads of those with the right demographics. This is what is important to remember: The purpose of programs is not to entertain but to gather eyeballs to see commercials (or product placement). The producers and owners do not care about conveying a liberal message. As Jack Warner was quoted as saying, “If I want to send a message, I’ll call Western Union.”

For all the, in my view, well-earned enmity that liberals pile on Rupert Murdock, he would go far left to get eyeballs in China and at least softcore to get readers in England. He isn’t about ideology; it is, as in the God Father, “Only business.”

As to the allegation that those who spend over 4 hours a night watching TV do less charitable work than non TV watchers…Well, duh. They do less exercise and, going back to a previous topic, they probably tend more towards obesity.

Where TV does influence politics indirectly is with role models and values. In Star Trek, Kirk kissing Uhura made a difference—arguably the first black white kiss. Ellen Degeneres makes a difference as did Will and Grace. So too does the casting people of color as hoods and hookers.

I don’t believe much of anything is intended to change our politics outside of cable. We seek and find our fellow travelers right and left and sort by interest. Opera for 5 hours or NASCAR. It’s not the time.

Conservative media critic Michael Medved writes about a new study that suggests a correlation between the amount of TV one watches and how liberal one is politically (and socially). That is, watch a lot of TV, and you're likely to be liberal; watch little, and you're likely to be conservative.

I don't know how much stock to put in these findings, and you can take or leave Medved's analysis of them, but I will say this: I am not only a light TV viewer, I am a ZERO TV viewer. (At least for now I am. In the fall I will watch football if the Patriots are on TV, which is never often enough in SoCal. Even still, this is three hours a week, max.)

And I fall predictably into all the "conservative" categories -- I even correspond with the supposedly anomalous trend of light TV watchers to gravitate toward the "liberal" position on immigration.

I'd be curious to know what our readers and my fellow bloggers think of this ...

The old stereotype about Republicans is that they are a soulless, compassion-less bunch of greedy rich folks whose only concern is Big Business and the bottom line. I've never thought the stereotype very fair, but there are certainly some in the party who do their best to perpetuate it. The text below comes from a Daily News Sunday story about New Majority, a SoCal group of self-described "moderate" Republicans. It quotes John Kilroy, head of the Los Angeles chapter and chairman of Kilroy Realty Corp.:

"We are a Republican organization, but we want to return the party so that people here feel they have a choice and not get involved with all the wedge issues that seem to divide us. What we are looking for is to reduce the influence of those on the extreme end of issues."

For the New Majority, Kilroy said that means staying away from issues such as abortion rights and immigration.

"We have people who are pro-choice and people who are pro-life," Kilroy said. "There is no litmus test, only if they agree with our desire to have a government that is more business-friendly."

Translation: We hold nothing sacred, no position is beyond the pale, and all moral principles are up for grabs -- except for lower taxes and less regulation, which are non-negotiable.

This is "moderate"?

H/T Mark Shea.

The Boston Globe's token conservative, columnist Jeff Jacoby, puts into perspective immigration restrictionists' oft-repeated complaint that illegal immigrants have "cut to the front of the line" to get into the U.S.:

Illegal immigrants don't steal across the Mexican border because they lack the patience to wait their turn in line. They do it because there is no line for them to wait in. ...

For most illegal immigrants, a legal option simply doesn't exist. Under current law, a young Mexican or Salvadoran who wants to improve his life by moving to America and working hard at a useful job generally has just two options: (a) Enter illegally, or (b) stay out forever. Several hundred thousand a year choose option (a).

Good point, and it underscores something I've said before: If you want to reduce illegal immigration, you must increase legal immigration.

Something is definitely wrong with our system when the leading cause of death on deathrow is not lethal injections or even natural causes, as appeal after appeal stretch on towards infinity. The leading cause of death is suicide!

As we debate with exquisite sensitivity whether murderers feel too much pain when injected with drugs designed to kill them, they apparently have become upset by the tension, the tedium and the fact that deathrow just isn’t as much fun as they may have imagined at the start of their felonious careers.

Clearly, if we worry about painful injections, we must treat their boredom and depression. If there is no other consequence to the Paris Hilton story (I sincerely apologize for writing that name. It really goes against my principles), it will be to treat the mental health and boredom issues of our leading murderers. How cruel it is to let them stew in their own juices and lose the will to live.

As a card carrying liberal, I know I’m supposed to be against the death penalty, and I was—until I became a parent. Then I realized that if you hurt my baby, I would happily drop the hammer on you, bust a cap, pull the trigger or just personally whack you.

Snow however, I find myself no longer philosophically opposed to the death penalty but practically opposed. We just do not apply the penalty with justice or equality. And while no system can be perfect, the imbalances of who is executed and who not for similar crimes is deeply troubling. Males, African-Americans, Hispanics and the poor get death in a hugely higher percentage than the rich, the white and the female.

I say, let’s have affirmative action on death row. Let’s execute a bunch of rich white women before another poor male of color is injected. Meanwhile, those who do not die of old age or boredom must be treated for their depression. Or is it too much to hope that they may actually feel tortured by feeling of guilt? Yeah, way too much to hope for.

Holly Ashcraft is the USC student who has not once, but twice discarded her newborn babies. In both cases, she claims, the infants were stillborn, although in the first there's no way to know, as the baby's body was never found, and in the second, the coroner ruled otherwise.

Not that any of this evidence matters. Ashcraft's family hired her the service of slick lawyer to the stars Mark Geragos (of Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson fame), and Geragos has succeeded in getting his client off the hook. First he was able to persuade a judge to knock down the charge of murder to manslaughter, and now he's been able to knock out the manslaughter charge on a bizarre technicality.

Since, under California law, charges cannot be filed on the same killing more than twice, this most likely means that Ashcraft will walk ... something neither of her two children ever got a chance to do.

Last week's Daily News series on porn featured an article about how religious groups are trying to fight the industry in the San Fernando Valley. Their weapons: Prayer. Conversion. Evangelization. Witnessing.

Compare that story to this report about how the Iranian government is trying to stop porn: Putting people to death.

And please remember the difference next time some glib secularist claims that America's "religious right" is an "American Taliban" trying to impose a "theocracy" on the rest of us.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson

In a collect call to ABC’s Barbara Walter from the Los Angeles County Jail a solemn and pensive Paris Hilton claimed that she’s no longer a Bimbo and that she wants to make a difference in people’s lives. The credit for her sudden stunning activist epiphany must go to the coalition of Los Angeles civil rights leaders that publicly challenged Hilton to be an advocate for prisoner rights two days before she called Walters. There are certainly plenty of candidates for her to help at the jail. Unlike her, they are nameless, and faceless, mostly poor, and minority. But like her, many of them are female. Hilton discovered from her ordeal that thousands of women are doing time, many of them hard time, behind bars in America’s jails and prisons. According to a Justice Department report in 2004 on America’s jail population, women make up about 10 percent of the America’s inmates. There are more women than ever serving time.

They are increasingly expanding the women’s prison-industrial complex. From 1930 to 1950 five women’s prisons were built nationally. During the 1980s and 1990s dozens more prisons were built, and a growing number of them are maximum-security women’s prisons. But the prison-building splurge hasn't kept pace with the swelling number of women prisoners. Women's prisons are understaffed, overcrowded, lack recreation facilities, serve poor quality food, suffer chronic shortages of family planning counselors and services, and gynecological specialists, drug treatment and child care facilities, and transportation funds for family visits.

More women are behind bars as much because of a tough public mood toward punishment than their actual crimes. One out of three crimes committed by women are drug related. Many state and federal sentencing laws mandate minimum sentences for all drug offenders. This virtually eliminates the option of referring non-violent first time offenders to increasingly scarce, financially strapped drug treatment, counseling and education programs. Stiffer punishment for crack cocaine use also has landed more black women in prison, and for longer sentences than white women (and men).

Then there’s the feminization of poverty and racial stereotyping. More than one out of three black women jailed did not complete high school, were unemployed, or had incomes below the poverty level at the time of their arrest. More than half of them were single parents.

The quantum leap in women behind bars has had a devastating impact on families and the quality of life in many communities. Thousands of children of incarcerated women are raised by grandparents, or warehoused in foster homes and institutions. The children are frequently denied visits because the mothers are deemed unfit. This prevents mothers from developing parenting and nurturing skills and badly harms the parent-child bond. Many children of imprisoned women drift into delinquency, gangs and drug use. This perpetuates the vicious cycle of poverty, crime and violence. There are many cases where parents and even grandparents are jailed.

There is little sign that this will change. Much of the public and many politicians are deeply trapped in the damaging cycle of myths, misconceptions and panic about crime-on-the-loose women. They are loath to increase funds and programs for job and skills training, drug treatment, education, childcare and health, and parenting skills.

If Hilton became a social advocate it wouldn’t be unique. Her celebrity counterpart turned one time convict, Martha Stewart had her own epiphany after a stint in a prison in Alderson, West Virginia in 2005. In a message from prison, Stewart practically reveled in the fact that she celebrated Thanksgiving in the company of a convicted cocaine dealer. Her daily shoulder rub with other women prisoners opened her eyes wide to the gaping iniquities in the criminal justice system. She called for reforms in sentencing and a drastic improvement in the programs and services to help women and first time offenders rebuild their lives. When a glamour figure such as Stewart demands prison reform it makes news. And at least for a fleeting moment gets the attention of a yawning public to the plight of women imprisoned.

Hilton’s glitter, party going, paparazzi driven, media voyeuristic world of fortune was even more light years removed from the grim world of the many poor women that are behind bars than Stewart’s world was from theirs. But, like Stewart, that world came crashing down with her jailing, and the public disgust and rage at her for trying to worm out of punishment. Her epiphany won’t totally dab away the heavy layer of taint on her image. But if Hilton can toss some of her celebrity glare, as Stewart did, on the thousands of poor, needy females in and out of America’s jails it will be a mild boost for the prison reform battle. Then, and only then, can she really say that she made a difference.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics (Middle Passage Press and Hispanic Economics New York) in English and Spanish will be out in October.

Expressing anger, sorrow, and frustration, Chew Baca today joined the growing chorus of those denouncing his brother, Lee, the sheriff of Los Angeles County. "I'm tired of the way Lee favors celebrities," Chewie growled, adding "Arrrrgggggghhhhhhh!"

Sheriff Baca dismissed his brother's grumblings as the whinings of a "big crybaby," and mocked Chewie as a "walking carpet." When Chewie snickered at those comments, Lee tersely fired back, "Laugh it up, fuzzball."

But Chewie says he has come to expect such remarks from his brother. "It's the story of our lives," the wookiee lamented. "Lee's always been jealous because I got the hair and the natural talent for public-speaking."

Developing ...

One last note on fat: Jonathan is, as usual, thoughtful and decent in his post in the fat series. He's also caused me to re-examine my own comment, lest my weakness for the bad pun come across as ridicule. Mea culpa.

The fat is in the fire on the obesity issue. Do we do fat jokes and make the obese feel bad about themselves or stand idly by and pretend not to notice? Is the choice Ridicule versus Indifference? I don’t think so.

In the words of John Edwards (all I suspect we’ll remember of his candidacy years from now): “There are two Americas.” He’s talking about the rich and the poor, but he could be speaking of the fat and the thin. Only in America are the super rich super thin and the poor disproportionately obese. There sometimes seems to be a race between the rich trying to starve to death and the poor trying to eat themselves to death.

Our idea, or someone’s idea, of female beauty must be seriously warped to look at our starlets. Death-camp chic is just perverse and unattractive—as well as unhealthy and un-natural. Our poor do not lack in calories, but eat fast food and junk food. Sometimes out of ignorance and sometimes convenience.

We often give a cultural explanation, but that doesn’t really work. People explain rationalize by talking about the traditional Hispanic diet of beans refried in lard or the African American diet as being high in pork and other fatty cuts because they were inexpensive. All very tempting explanations.

Sometimes the rationale is that certain cultures traditionally ate coloricaly dense foods because of the great demands of manual labor. They say that the diet has remained the same, but the people have stopped working hard. This, of course, implies the poor obese are also lazy. This is mostly nonsense.

There is an old story of the famous wraith thin English author and wit, George Bernard Shaw sitting next to the rotund William Gladstone, 19th century English prime minister. Gladstone turned to Shaw and remarked, “To look at you Shaw, one would think there were a famine in England.” Shaw replied, “And to look at you, one would discern its cause.”

Well, I don’t blame Gladstone, the poor or even our fast food industry. I blame God. God put the flavor in fat, not celery. God made the ice cream taste better than the spinach. God had other choices and should take some responsibility. After all, why was the apple off limits? There was a healthy, vitamin rich, relatively high fiber snack.

I can’t really answer this theological question, but maybe, just maybe, God is in more of a hurry to welcome and hang out with the zaftig poor than to have to deal with Paris, Lindsey and the other rich anorexics. Who could blame Him?

Hamas and Fatah are one news cycle away from full-scale war, at a time when peace deals have eroded to lasting hours instead of days and the wires are buzzing that Hamas is launching a coup against Mahmoud Abbas. The New York Times story I'm sitting here reading says that militants are tossing handcuffed people off tall buildings, executing and kneecapping people as organized military units deployed. To say the sectarian warfare had reached insanity would be an insult to patients in asylums.

Whose fault is the escalation in violence? Why, our fault, according to a U.N. report obtained by The Guardian. Because we wouldn't financially support a ruling party that engaged in terrorist acts and advocated the destruction of its neighbor and our ally. Never mind the internal elements: a) religious, as Hamas is more fundamentalist and Fatah more secular, b) political, as Abbas' willing to work with Israel has raised Hamas' ire, c) egotistical, as both sides will fight to the death to come out on top regardless of what truces are brokered by hapless leaders. But in the midst of this, we're blamed for not engaging these guys diplomatically. However, for someone to sit down for talks, they have to be interested in the conversation in the first place. Hamas and Fatah are raring to fight, and Hamas will never rest until Israel is no more.

UPDATE: Did I call it? Stayed through deadline, came home, and saw that Hamas just seized Fatah HQ in Gaza, effectively starting the civil war. Must be America's fault.

Thank you, Bridget, for drawing our attention to the obesity crisis that's, er, weighing down our children. I don't mean to make light -- sorry! -- of the situation, but I just want to point out the fat, er, fact, that rampant obesity would seem to flatten Assemblyman Mark Leno's bloated claim that we're all starving because of an under-nourished food-stamp program.

Our nation -- the inner-city in particular -- can't be both obese and famished at the same time. As the ever-mounting girth of the nation suggests, we have a problem on our hands, but it's not hunger.

PS -- Yes, I think South Park refs limit has been maxed. Thank you for asking!

I'm not a parent, so I'm not going to offer wise words on this story about medical wonks encouraging doctors to not play semantics and call kids "obese" if the situation warrants. Just keep in mind the PC alternatives from that 9-year-old master of everything politically incorrect, Cartman:

"I'm not fat! I'm festively plump!"

"I'm not fat! I'm big-boned."

"I'm not fat! I just haven't grown into my body yet."

Was that my daily limit of "South Park" references?

What's that splash sound I hear in South America? Why, it could be Hugo Chavez officially jumping the shark! I predicted (here and here) that Chavez's decision to close Radio Caracas TV for not giving him the requisite glorification would backfire, and bam! -- El Universal releases a telling poll today in which respondents span social classes and were polled across Venezuela:

79 percent thought Chavez's move to kill RCTV was an "antidemocratic whim"

When asked to choose between democracy and Chavez's dream of socialism, 60 percent preferred full democracy

74 percent thought Venezuelan democracy is endangered

And, interestingly, 60 percent thought Chavez's constant bloviating about the U.S. "empire" wanting to attack Venezuela is overblown and a government manipulation

Venezuela still has a long way to go -- like finding a charismatic leader fully committed to democracy to stand up to Chavez and his alliances -- but the public sentiment and protests in the streets are the first signs that all is not so rosy-red in the Bolivarian wonderland.

Well, everyone's favorite undeclared presidential candidate who's not named Al Gore -- Fred Thompson -- will be appearing on Jay Leno tonight. And as Arnold taught us four(!) years ago, if a politician's going on Leno, he must be serious. Someone check with Oprah's bookers, if they've got Fred within the next week, it's a done deal.

Bridget's column and post shed light on an important part of the immigration debate -- the extremists. And while Bridget looks specifically at the reconquista types, the extremists are to be found on both sides of the debate. On the restrictionist side, they come in the guise of nativists and racists.

Politically, it is dangerous to say this -- just as it is dangerous to talk candidly about the reconquistas. That's because, in this over-charged debate, point out the extremists on one side, and all the people on that side think you're talking about them. So you get comments like:

"What do you mean all Latinos are anti-American?" or "How can you say that all illegal-immigration opponents are racist?"

Today in the Daily News I write about that which has no place in the immigration debate: the separatists. When I first started attending immigration rallies -- mingling in the crowd to listen, take notes, take pics -- I immediately noticed the Mexica Movement demonstrators. So to accompany my column I dug through my photo files for shots I've taken of the group and its signs, now posted here.

I should note that reaction from others at these rallies is decidedly mixed. As I noted in my column, the Mexica Movement is often the slickest, best-prepared, best-organized, and loudest participant group at demonstrations. Some other protesters ignore them and, as I also noted in my column, wave American flags and chant "USA!", depending on the familial or confrontational nature of the protest; others curiously take literature and stop to read their signs. And yet sprinkled throughout the crowd are consistently a few more with handmade signs expressing separatist or supremacist sentiments of their own. The definition of fair immigration reform even among pro-immigration demonstrators varies as widely as our melting pot.

Finally, a grassroots effort I can wholeheartedly support: Left Lane Drivers of America.

The organization has a website dedicated to reminding slow drivers
to get out of the left lane. It's main purpose sems to be selling these big decals, which, as much as I hate slow drivers in the fast lane, I would never plaster to my own windshield.

It's a noble cause, but I doubt that the group's going to get people to stick those big stickers on their windshield in a city where people are even loathe to put free parking stickers on their waxed babies. Good luck to them.

I know it doesn’t look this way at first blush, but George W Bush must be the luckiest man alive. While it is true that liberals can’t stand him and increasingly even his own party is deserting him and his core base is highly alienated by his immigration stand, still his enemies are a blessing to him. He has few friends but really terrific enemies.

He took an immediate dislike to Yasser Arafat and thought he was a liar and had no potential as a partner in peace. He was right. He hated Saddam Hussein, who, after all, did try to assassinate his father. No question that Saddam was a very bad man and richly deserved his fate. Bush reasonably concludes that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a lunatic of such proportion that he is an embarrassment to lunatics everywhere.

And what could stop Bush’s fall faster than an Iranian president who want to build up their nuclear industry, lies about its programs, promises to use nukes only for energy (while sitting on one of the greatest know oil reserves on the planet) and is both a Holocaust denier and advocates for the destruction of the state of Israel? (But just for practice. We’re next on his list.)

Add to this already remarkable pantheon of nogoodniks, Chavez of Venezuela, another raging anti-Semite, and general pain in the side of decency. And now, the piece de resistance is good ole Danny Ortega, a former Marxist (he says) and current self-proclaimed churchman who aspires to bring Nicaragua back to the future as a partner is revolution with Chavez and Fidel.

Kim Jong-Il is one more guy who is easy to hate—another despot who spends on personal luxuries while his people eat grass, and who is also developing nuclear weapons.

I have to tell you that as a liberal I have never voted for W (or even contemplated it seriously) but I am very impressed by the quality of his enemies. You know, I might consider going more pro W if he would just move Putin and Musharraf into the enemies category.

No political circus is complete without the stagecraft of Al Sharpton, so you gotta love Big Al's insertion ino the Paris Hilton drama. I love this graf from the Daily News story about Baca and Sharpton's meeting:

Over the weekend, Sharpton said he believed Hilton was given the star treatment because she is white and rich, and questioned whether a rap star would have been allowed to go home early

What is the correct answer to this question? "Why yes, Al, we would let a rap star off the hook easily, too. We give preferential treatment to all celebrities!"

Would that make Sharpton happy?

Well, given that he's rich and famous, perhaps so. Then he, too, would be assured a get-out-of-jail-fee card in L.A.

(As an aside, check out the DN's Sunday editorial, First Paris, Now Baca.) Key quote:

Sauer has done the public a great service by ensuring that, for once, a powerful figure in L.A. will face the same justice as everyone else. He could underscore that message by making sure it applies to Baca, too.

Style icons Daniel Ortega and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad got together over the weekend to basically plot world domination -- and, most likely, raid each other's wardrobes. What in the world do Nicaragua and Iran have in common? According to Ahmadinejad, "The Iranian and Nicaraguan nations share great potentials and capabilities. They can help each other in the path of independence and freedom." That roughly translates to, "We hate the West and want to present a unified front." Though Ortega stopped to pay sentimental tribute at the tomb of the Ayatollah Khomeini, don't expect Nicaragua to suddenly turn into an Islamic state. Do expect, however, Ortega to tow the line as the puppy of Hugo Chavez (who helped him get elected) in cementing an anti-West alliance that reaches to the south of the U.S. all the way to soon-to-be-nuclear Tehran.

And so much for any presumptions about the newer, mellowed-out Marxist Ortega. The Islamic Republic News Agency reports him "shouting with clenched fists" at a "ceremony on international resistance":

"Viva Iranian nation, Viva Islamic combatants, Viva Latin American and Asian nations until ever-lasting freedom and victory!"

This goes back a few days, but I couldn't resist commenting on Fabian Nunez's pathetic attempt to spin the defeat of his wretched assisted-suicide bill. Why did death-by-doctor go down for the third straight time? Because it was "demonized by the religious right," says Nunez.

Really? It was the Religious Right that kept the Assembly's Democratic members -- gerrymandered to be among the party's most liberal -- from backing the euthanasia bill? (Democrats could have passed this without a single Republican vote.) Who knew that the Religious Right held such sway among Assembly Dems? And where was this powerful force last week when the very same Assembly Dems endorsed "gay marriage"?

Or by "Religious Right," does Nunez mean the vast coalition of disability-rights and medical organizations that fought to defeat his bill? Because you know, the CMA, AMA and disability-activist groups are well-known stooges for the Moral Majority.

Or maybe Nunez meant Cardinal Mahony, who rightly called out Nunez, a Catholic, for supporting this legislation that is gravely sinful in the eyes of the church that Nunez claims to recognize as the Mystical Body of Christ. But Roger Mahony? Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's best friend, the guy who leads all the immigration marches? This would be the first -- and probably last -- time he's been described as politically "right."

No, it's not the religious-right bogeyman that's to blame here. Assisted suicide failed in California -- as it has in every state but Oregon -- because it's a creepy, bigoted idea that not even the super-secular-left Assembly Democrats could abide.

If there is any demonization going on here, Nunez is the one doing it.

As I mentioned in the previous post, I'm sick, and as such, I spent much of the weekend in bed, thinking about ... Paris Hilton. Specifically, I can't understand why she' s so bugged out about spending a few weeks in jail.

Don't get me wrong: County Lockup is no place I'd like to be. Zachary Urbina wrote a fine piece for us a week ago about what an unpleasant place it is. But as for me, my biggest fear about jail would be the other inmates, and what they might to do me. Beyond that, I would think the rest would be tolerable -- sure the food might be bad, the bed hard, but these are not impossible burdens.

In the case of Paris, the other inmates are not a concern. She's being kept in a protective, isolated cell. So is it merely the prospect of bad food and a hard bed that has her wailing hysterically at the courthouse? If so, maybe there's some truth to Sheriff Baca's (reported) concerns for her mental stability ...

Special thanks to Friendly Fire's newest bloggers, Jonathan Dobrer, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, and Bridget Johnson, who kept the site alive and lively all weekend! What a great crew we have here!

BTW, in case you missed it, EOH has a piece in Viewpoint this weekend -- Nuñez aims at extending term limits. And Bridget, of course, is a regular columnist at DailyNews.com. Witness her latest, Venezuelans not content to be Chavez's voiceless proletariat. Jonathan is also a regular on our pages; he wrote the cover piece for the 6-3 Viewpoint, Driven to Distraction.

Hopefully they'll be doing a lot of blogging this week, because as Mariel mentioned, she's out of town. And as for me, well ...

MY WHOLE FAMILY IS SICK. Everyone, me included. Wife's got bronchitis. My two sons have got colds. My daughter has pinkeye. And I've got the flu.

So I'm at home today. My wife and I are taking turns napping/caring for the kids, and I'm trying to do some DN, FF work on the side. Say prayers and wish us luck -- we'll need'em!

Taliban stragglers -- who recently lost their one-legged commander Mullah Dadullah but still have their one-eyed leader Mullah Omar -- fired rockets in an attempt to whack Afghan President Hamid Karzai as he spoke to villagers in Ghazni province. The rockets were way off the mark -- so much so that Karzai said, "Please sit down. Don't be scared. Nothing is happening."

This makes the third attempt on Karzai's life since the Taliban got the boot in 2001, which still doesn't bring him up to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's ever-rising assassination attempt total that stands at at least four since 1999. Pervez has survived driving over a bomb on a bridge, and a pair of suicide car bombers in 2003 only cracked his windshield. Have producers ever considered recasting the next "Rambo" movie? I see sets in Waziristan...

There's no shortage of hatred for President Bush, and unfortunately much of it is right on our shores. So it was nice, particularly after a week of clownish protesters raising hell in Germany at the G-8 summit and rioters in Rome, to see Bush get a warm reception in Albania on Sunday. "Warm" is actually an understatement: It was a cuddly, passionate, ecstatic lovefest. Crowds waved Albanian and American flags, donned Uncle Sam hats, and even tried to rub Bush's mane as people pushed to try to touch our president or shake his hand. Prime Minister Sali Berisha called Bush “the greatest and most distinguished guest we have ever had in all times.” Albania has issued postage stamps bearing Bush's likeness -- a move that would probably make some Americans riot at the post office -- and named a street in the capital Tirana after G.W. And Bush isn't the only focus of Albanians' love -- they generally love America, from how Woodrow Wilson kept their county intact after World War I to Bill Clinton's intercession in Kosovo.

Now, Bush-haters will probably write off the Albanian Bush-lovers as Balkan yokels uneducated in the ways of their object of disdain. Writing off quotes such as this:

"The U.S. holds the key to the balance of power in the world, and for a small country like us, this is marvelous," said Tirana resident Lufti Zeneli. "They helped us in the liberation of Kosovo. America is fantastic."

For them, it's pretty simple: They've forged their democracy after decades of totalitarian rule, and think democracy is a pretty good thing. Unlike foreign aid that rarely makes it to the pocketbooks of ordinary citizens, many Albanians have benefited from U.S. loans for small businesses, and think entrepreneurship and capitalism are pretty good things. No matter how many Americans hate Bush, surely we can all feel a bit of pride at one small country's outpouring for America and its present leader. Now go back to the all-consuming Bush-hating.

Paris Should Demand The Hilton Treatment For Poor Mentally Challenged Inmates

Earl Ofari Hutchinson

A twisting, grimacing, tear shrieked Paris Hilton shouted “Mom, Mom, It’s not right” as she was yanked from the downtown Los Angeles courtroom after being ordered to finish out her jail time. The tears were more than the agony wrench of a selfish, pampered, hyper-privileged airhead socialite terrified at the thought of spending a few weeks in the slammer. Her tears sprang from the same psychological trauma that afflict a staggering number of others in America’s jails and prisons, namely those who have acute or chronic mental health issues. The Federal Bureau of Justice estimates that more than a quarter-million offenders are warehoused in America’s jails and prisons that suffer acute mental problems. That’s about sixteen percent of the total jail population in America. In California’s jails alone, an estimated 85,000 prisoners suffer mental ailments.
Unlike Hilton, the overwhelming majority of them are poor, indigent, minority, and like her increasingly female. They have absolutely no access to any quality psychiatric care and treatment behind bars. The majority of them, like Hilton, are not violent offenders, but were convicted of petty, low level crimes. The magnitude of the crisis of the mentally challenged imprisoned is so great that the L.A. County system that Hilton is now a guest of has the dubious distinction of being the biggest mental health facility in the nation. A report in 2004 lambasted the county for the chronic shortage of doctors, nurses, medicines, and support services at the L.A. jails. Since then, there have been some modest improvements in the general quality of medical care for inmates within the jails. The changes, though, were made under heavy pressure from prison reform groups such as the ACLU, an adverse federal court ruling, and the imposition of a federal consent decree to make changes. But for many inmates especially the mentally ill the conditions are still severe.
A livid judge, police officials, prosecutors, and much of the public railed against Hilton’s release as blatant celebrity favoritism. It was certainly that. But the irony is that Hilton was and should have been released early precisely because she couldn’t get the quality treatment she needed at the jail. The problem, of course, is that neither can any of those who aren’t rich and famous like her, and won’t get favored prisoner treatment.
A significant number of prisoners in the L.A. county jail, and in other overstuffed jails around the country are released without having had a medical exam. There is no way of telling what kind of mental ailments they suffer from. That virtually insures that those individuals with the same untreated mental problems that got them locked up in the first place will be jailed again.
Long before the end of her jail stint, Hilton will know first hand the pain and misery that dozens of these inmates in the L.A. County Jail, and the thousands more like them in state jails and prisons face daily. Maybe that will even sensitive her to their plight. If so, she has a prize opportunity to do something that before her legal woes she would never in her wildest dreams have thought of. She can act as the poster woman for the rights of those jailed that have psychological maladies.
But unlike her won’t get a favored early release to seek quality care and treatment. Her wealth, fame, and celebrity notoriety on their behalf could help keep the public and media glare on the crisis problem of the inadequate care and treatment for mentally challenged inmates. This would prod law enforcement officials and politicians to radically increase funds, programs, and services for their care and treatment. It would also spur L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca who stoked public ire by releasing her early and those that run the nation’s urban jails to end the favoritism that results in a handful of privileged, well-to-do inmates getting early release as Hilton momentarily got. They are free to seek outside treatment while the poor and indigent with medical ailments who don’t pose a public safety threat remain locked up.
The instant that Hilton got favored prisoner status bestowed on her the same media and public that she’s made a cheap career out of titillating with her sex-laced escapades did an O.J. Simpson like pirouette and roundly vilified her. Putting her name, fame, and money behind the cause of prison medical reform would do much to redeem her name. This time for something socially useful and that can make a difference in people’s lives.
She’d join the growing legion of celebrities that have finally got it and seen that there’s a bigger world beyond jet set parties, the whirl of cameras, block long stretch limos, mansion living, and playing hide and seek with the paparazzi. They have used their star power to do a little good for humanity. Hilton can transform herself and her reputation from that of selfish, spoiled heiress Hilton to socially responsible Hilton by demanding the Hilton treatment for others.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics (Middle Passage Press and Hispanic Economics New York) in English and Spanish will be out in October.

Watching the candidates’ debates is like attending a performance of the old musical A Chorus Line. In the musical a bunch of dancers are brought up on stage to show their stuff to the director—an unseen but heard presence who sits in judgment of them and decides who is dismissed, who gets a callback and who eventually may star. The audience doesn’t really understand the criteria, but simply attaches to various characters and their stories. There are has-beens, potential stars and wannabees. Even those of us unschooled in dance can predict who won’t make it, but we can’t know who will.

A Chorus Line is a musical that pretends it’s an audition. The candidates’ debates are auditions that pretend to be shows. These are not actually debates. Some observers have characterized them as side by side by side press conferences. This is closer to the truth. The best way to understand these cable shows is as an audition. But they are not auditioning for us, “We the People.” They are auditioning for the unseen, yet clearly heard, directors: The guys with checkbooks.

Our current candidates’ debates seem, on the surface, to answer the philosophical question: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there, does it make a sound? Since fewer than 2 million people watched any portion of the Republican or Democratic candidates’ debate, we may ask if it makes any noise at all? Save for the lightening strike during Giuliani’s abortion response, the clear answer is: It depends.

The public is not paying attention. The news media are only looking for sound bites of either attacks or gaffs. However, there is noise in the forest. It is the rustle of big money.

Some pundits get upset that the media is covering the horse race instead of the substance. This would be an understandable criticism if there were, in fact, any substance to cover. All the candidates are all following the example of Mohammad Ali and trying to “float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.” They are trying to stay out of harms way while peppering their opponents with light, and mostly harmless, jabs.

Pundits get even more upset when the media covers the dollar race and gauges the candidates by how much they are raising. But this is at exactly the heart of the story. Those who attract money will survive to the next round. Those who don’t will fade.

Who will live and who will die (politically) is not a function of what the few civilians who watch these cattle call auditions think. It is what the checkbooks think. That is the story, and it has important, if distressing, ramifications to our nation and the world.

Cable news interrupted hours-long analysis of Paris Hilton to air live footage of President Bush arriving at the Vatican and greeting the pope! It's a miracle!!

Of course, before you could say three Hail Marys and an Our Father the camera feed was back to the Paris Hilton News Network, but the feat of getting networks to pry themselves away from Paris to the pope should not be underestimated. Log this as a miracle for Benedict's inevitable canonization investigation. Really!

So I noticed this AP headline a few hours ago:

Report: Olmert will cede Golan for peace

Because that worked so well in Gaza?

The circumstances are a tad different: Israeli PM Ehud Olmert thinks that if he gives the Golan Heights to Syria, Bashar Assad will tell Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to take a flying leap, according to newspaper Yediot Ahronot. Interesting, because not even a year ago Syria was backing Hezbollah in its war with Israel. In fact, Syria harbors Hamas leader Khaled Meshal -- who, according to Shimon Peres, ordered the abduction of soldier Gilad Shalit in a raid from Gaza that touched off the conflict on the Lebanese border, as well.

But the results would be the same: Disaster.

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has acknowledged that when Israel moved out of Gaza, al-Qaida moved in. In fact, a group claiming to be linked to al-Qaida has made BBC correspondent Alan Johnston the longest-held captive to date in Gaza. Viewing the pullout as an Israeli defeat, militants saw Gaza as a launching pad for rocket attacks on Israel. Fatah (pictured toting their toys) and Hamas fight openly in the street, catching other Palestinians in the crossfire, with token daylong cease-fires peppering the violence. The factional fighting is so out of control that many Gaza residents find themselves preferring the days of the Israeli presence, according to a recent Reuters story.

What would happen if Syria accepted Olmert's purported offer? I can guarantee this: Syria won't give up its BFF Iran. Bashar Assad's friends are fewer and farther in between, and there's nothing like the friendship of an increasingly powerful Iran to ensure his dictatorial seat. You can ask who's got his back, and who's got his back who's also about to have nukes. Just a few months ago, Assad and Ahmadinejad got cozy and renewed their alliance -- especially against their common enemy, Israel. Assad would renege on any such offer faster than you could say West Bank, and would triumphantly lift up Golan as one more notch toward eliminating Israel.

Don't do it, Olmert...

You thought Paris Hilton returning to the Lynwood lockup was the only celebrity-justice drama of the day? In a shiny gift straight from the tabloid gods, George Michael, the former Wham! singer who is so well-known to Beverly Hills park patrons, was sentenced across the pond for driving under the influence of drugs. And we mean under the influence -- weaving the wrong way down a north London street and then found slumped over the wheel. For his latest indiscretions, Michael was sentenced to 100 hours of community service, ordered to pay $4,622 in court costs and banned from driving for two years, a brutal blow to anyone who can afford a chauffeur.

The moral of the story? Move to London, Paris! That's some serious celeb wrist-slapping there. Plus she could probably count snow-shoveling on "The Simple Life" tapings as community service!

I now return to reading about foreign policy. Really. After I set a reminder to watch the latest "Simple Life" episode. And stick my "Faith" CD in the player.

You never know what went wrong in a marriage, but one has to figure the political life -- especially at Antonio's frenetic pace -- must wreak havoc on a relationship. God bless them, and their kids, too.

The announcement by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa about his marriage's breakup this afternoon confirms what reporters had heard months ago. But even the tentative and gentle questions were treated as if they were the most unfair shots. Now we know.

VILLARAIGOSA ANNOUNCES SEPARATION LOS ANGELES - Today Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced that he and First Lady Corina Villaraigosa are separating after more than twenty years of marriage.

That will be the Daily News Friendly Fire's fate next week as I, Mariel Garza, take a week off to see family, friends and my old buddies William Bratton and Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Bay Area. It seems the LAPD chief and the state governor are both speaking at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists conference in San jose which I am also attending. Bratton's going to be on a panel with two journalists who got whacked around during the May Day melee. Seems that even 300-something miles away I can't escape L.A.'s politics.

I will be blogging lightly during the week, but only if something really juicy comes up.

This is my first blog entry, and, of course, I want to make a good impression and draw readers into a conversation on the important, and sometimes the trivial, issues of our day. I realize that starting off with a Latin title could seem just the tiniest bit pretentious and off-putting, but I am going to trust you to stick with me till the end when I explain why Scribo Ergo Sum, “I write, therefore I am,” is true for me.

I wanted to entitle this first piece “I blog, therefore I am,” but “blog” is a little tough to render in Latin. Web is pretty easy; a spider’s web is Aranea. Log however presents several possibilities. One sense of log is rooted in the word logic. Frankly, in reading some web logs, logic is not the first word that springs to mind. The other root is related to tree. This seems to be the real source of logs in the context of Captain’s logs. Because such logs consist of small and concise entries, their Latin word is Codicilli. Yes, like the codicil to a will. It is, literally, a small branch. I like the idea that the sound cilli (silly) is part of all this. So welcome to my first Aranea Codicilli

I have been writing most of my life. Starting in cuneiform in clay, then moving on to Hebrew on vellum, eventually in English with quill dipped in ink; progressing to fountain pens and typewriters on paper, I now find myself plying my trade with electrons on the web.

When I began writing, I got some very standard advice: Write what you know. I have spent my life not following that Polonius-like piece of common wisdom. This little motto didn’t really help me because when I was young, I thought I knew everything. Thus the entire world seemed to fit nicely into my area of expertise. Not knowing the encyclopedic scope of my ignorance, in an abundance of chutzpah, I wrote about everything.

I still write about everything, but now my youthful certainties have been tempered by some humility and a sense of the full scope of my ignorance. Ignorance is not, in my view, a failing, only a condition that, unlike stupidity, can be remedied by knowledge.

In my youth, I wrote about what I did not know, not knowing that I did not know. Today I write about what I do not know but what I want to learn about. I write to try to bring a semblance of order out of the chaos of our world. I write to organize my own inchoate emotions and tame my anxieties.

I have come to learn that my essential aim is not to demonstrate technical expertise or specialized knowledge. What I offer is great curiosity about our world, our selves and how we can learn to appreciate each other and communicate across a wide spectrum of ideas with tolerance, understanding and humor.

Two things jumped off the page when L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca ordered Paris Hilton released. One was that he had the gall to release her. The other was that anyone whould be surprised that he did. Both again tell much about celebrity double standards.

Hilton sees nothing wrong in going home before she barely served anytime in jail. But why would she? Jails in America aren’t meant for a glamour girl, a jet set heiress that routinely titillates the gossip pages. Not surprisingly much of the media, and at times, even Hilton, has treated her bout with the law as a sideshow diversion that gives the public yet another voyeuristic glimpse into the screwed up lives of some of Hollywood’s glitterati.

Hilton is yet another in the endless textbook examples of the well-encoded grossly different legal standard for the rich and famous lawbreakers. In her inebriated state she could have mowed over one or more innocent pedestrians or wreaked havoc with other vehicles. To top it off she thumbed her nose at the court, and not once but twice broke her probation by driving while banned from taking the wheel. This is hardly an example of no harm, no foul light frivolity. America’s prisons and jails are filled with men and women that are serving stretches for DUI and probation violation convictions, some long stretches.

The same double standard that Hilton benefits from applies to other celebrity-accused lawbreakers. Their offenses were hardly schoolyard pranks. Winona Ryder was charged with grand theft shoplifting. Roman Polanski was charged with having sex with a minor. Zsa Zsa Gabor was charged with assaulting a police officer. Sean Combs was charged with bribery and illegal weapons possession. Robert Downey, Jr. was charged with countless numbers of drug possession offenses.

These charges have landed countless others in the slammer for long prison terms. An increasing number of those incarcerated are women, especially poor women. They make up the fastest growing number of America’s prison and jail population. Many of these women are non-violent offenders charged with drug and or alcohol abuse offenses. They wouldn’t or couldn’t implore as Hilton did in bold type on her MYSpace homepage thousands to sign an online petition drawn up by one of her pal groupies demanding that Schwarzenegger give her a pardon.

The New York Times has always held its West Coast municipal competition in contempt to the point that it refers to the entire region as desert and gets confused about geography. But now the Gray Lady seems to have some basic misunderstanding about how our local government works.

In Friday's breaking online news story by Maria Newman, the Times reports that the county has only one supervisor (and Don Knabe at that) and that Rocky Delgadillo is just another city attorney, not THE city attorney. What's next? Mayor Arnold? Sen. Villaraigosa?

Here are the humourous excerpts:

The county supervisor, Don Knabe, told The Associated Press: “What transpired here is outrageous.” He said he received more than 400 angry e-mails and hundreds more phone calls from around the country. Ms. Hilton’s return home gives the impression of “celebrity justice being handed out,” he said.

The city attorney who prosecuted her case, Rocky Delgadillo, said it was a case of preferential treatment for a celebrity. He asked the judge to order Ms. Hilton back to jail and asked the sheriff’s department to show why it should not be held in contempt of court for letting her go in the first place

Full story after the jumps

Here's what two self-defined reporters had to say in the L.A. Times' account of Paris Hilton's being sent back to jail:

Sauer originally sentenced Hilton to 45 days in jail after the professional party girl, reality-show actress and self-defined singer repeatedly violated her probation on alcohol-related reckless driving charges. (emphasis added)

Glad there's no editorializing going on there. Way to hit a gal when she's down, guys!

UPDATE: The words "self-defined" have since been purged from the Times story ...

Cartoonist Daryl Cagle employs the "Get Out of Jail Free" theme that appears in today's editorial.

Yet as the world watches an international-celebrity story, the backdrop is one of L.A. politics. City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo is actually the unsung hero in this saga. It is he who filed the petition leading to today's hearing, in which Paris may be sent back to jail. Not only that, Rocky is demanding that another L.A. pol -- Sheriff Lee Baca -- explain why he isn't in contempt of court for violating the judge's orders to keep Paris behind bars.

Who would have thought we'd see the day when one L.A. politician holds another accountable?

But I must admit that I'm starting to feel sorry for Hilton. The picture of her sobbing in the back of the police cruiser is just sad. The trappings of the celebrity lifestyle, the false gods of wealth and fame, must seem rather empty right now.

Maybe we can all learn something from this pathetic ordeal.

UPDATE: Judge send Paris back to jail.

Lt. Governor John Garamendi participates in the 33rd Annual Capitol Frog Jumping contest with a frog named "The New Pioneer."

Lt. Gov. John Garamendi must miss the rock'm sock'm wild west days as insurance commissioner. While the six-figure salary surely helps relieve the sorrow of a pointless existence, clearly he hasn't accepted his new role as the most useless pol in paradise.

Witness his heart-wrenching struggle to find purpose with this missive from his press people:

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR JOHN GARAMENDI ISSUES STATEMENT ON THE COMPLETION OF A $10 MILLION EXPANSION AND RENOVATION AT MUSEUM OF LATIN AMERICAN ART

So sad.
Jumpe here to read the full press release.

... is what California Senate President Don Perata ought to do from his goofy, disingenuous plan to put an Iraq War initiative on the February ballot. We smack down the idea in today's editorial, Perata's Ploy.

Reader Erik makes a good observation about my objection to using the word "adult" to describe porn. "Perhaps we need to use the word," he writes, "because we hope that no one but an adult would be involved."

He's right, no doubt, that this is what "adult" is supposed to suggest -- not for kids -- but I still maintain my objection. After all, everyone would agree that children shouldn't consume lead paint, but we don't classify chomping on paint chips as an "adult" activity.

Allison Margolin, AKA "L.A.'s dopest attorney

So says Allison Margolin, AKA "L.A.'s dopest attorney," in an op-ed in today's Daily News, Paris gets no special treatment:

As a criminal-defense attorney who deals on a daily basis with the realities of the court and jail system in Los Angeles, I've seen more than enough cases to know Paris didn't get special treatment. In fact, most low-level offenders sentenced to county jail typically serve no more than 10 percent of their sentences, no matter what the county court dictates.

The paper, on the other hand, takes a rather different position:

It should surprise no one that Hilton was given special treatment. Los Angeles' justice system has always favored the rich, famous and powerful.

This is the place where one underage actress' recent weekend of drinking, public drunkenness and hit-and-run accident didn't merit even a slap on the wrist.

It's where politicians convicted of public corruption don't even have to spend a day in jail.

It's where the Sheriff's Department suppressed the arrest report of a well-known actor who made anti-Semitic comments when popped for DUI.

What was surprising is that Hilton received jail time at all, and that the judge specifically ordered that she not serve soft time at home.

So do our letter-writers:

After O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake and now Paris Hilton, I strongly suggest that the Los Angeles city and county charters be changed to read: "Celebrities are entitled to get-out-of-jail cards at any time." In this way, the city and county can save money on costly trials.

Meanwhile, we're following up on reports that Sheriff Lee Baca is HIlton's latest BFF.

The Daily News has been running its series on pornography this week -- a solid, balanced effort, I think. But I have one quibble: the word "adult."

I can see the need for synonyms (how many times can you say "porn," smut," etc?), but do we have to use this lame euphemism? There's nothing "adult" about someone "pleasuring" himself in front of a computer screen. Indeed, this is generally the province of teenage boys, who, for the most part, leave it behind upon entering adulthood. Real adulthood means adult relationships, which involve commitment, love, respect, fidelity, sacrifice -- virtues utterly lacking in the degrading, narcissistic world of porn.

Not sure I get this toon, but it comes by way of the Toronto Star, so maybe it's written in Canadian. Anyway, it does seem like something of a travesty that SoCal won the championship in a sport few of us even acknowledge, at the expense of a city that lives and breathes hockey.

Well, suffice it to say Mariel and I disagree on assisted suicide. I, for one, am glad the bill failed, again. (Any chance that Levine and Berg will be willing to accept death for their legislation? Nah, expect them to revive it again next year.)

Although the stats from Oregon are in dispute -- they depend on self-reporting -- Mariel is right that the disagreement is primarily philosophical. The way I see it, If the law is going to try to prevent this guy from killing himself, I don't see why it should try to assist others who want to kill themselves just because they happen to be terminally ill (not even necessarily in pain, just terminal). As I wrote in a column on the subject a month ago:

Assisted-suicide supporters insinuate that dignity is not inherent in the human condition, but contingent upon one's abilities and the value society puts on them. Stick around too long -- become too weak, too feeble -- and you're undignified. Unlike other would-be suicides, your tragically low sense of self-worth is justified. (No wonder disability-rights groups also oppose this bill.)

Good riddance to a bad idea.

The Sacramento Bee is reporting today that California's Compassionate Choice bill to allow assisted suicide for terminal patients has been put down for this legislative year The bill was sponsored by Valley assemblyman and animal lover Lloyd Levine. It's too bad that the assembly isn't couragous enough to give dying people a choice in determining their final exit. Studies have shown that the similar Death with Dignity Act in Oregon has NOT sparked a rash of suicides, so the real debate is philosophical.

Oh, my heart bleeds for poor Mark Leno.

I just talked to my wife, who is the family budgetmaster, shopper, and menu planner. By her accounting, we spend about $500 a month in foodstuffs. Now that's for a family of five. Break that down, and that comes to about $23.33 per-person, per-week -- not far off from the $21-a-week that's starving Mr. Leno. And our stomachs aren't growling.

True, we don't go out very often. I bring a bagged lunch to work most days. And we don't eat much red meat except for hamburger. It is, to be sure, a far cry from the feasts and banquets to which Leno, his fellow legislators, and the lobbyists up in Sacramento have grown accustomed. But we are doing just fine, thank you very much, and we don't even need to resort to some of the more drastic money-saving techniques Mariel lists below.

Leno's bellyaching tells us a lot more about his appetites than it does about the food-stamp program.

San Francisco Assemblyman Mark Leno is an idealistic man, but one who's clearly never been poor. This week he bravely undertakes the food stamp challenge in which he tries to eat on $21 a week, which is the national average allotment to poor folk in these new compassionate conservative time.

On day 3, he's already having a tough time of it:

From his online diary of the experience:

my energy is drained, I am seriously hungry and feeling a bit ornery (yes, major low blood sugar). When I get home I will enjoy my allotted bowl of cereal. This experience of hunger is much different from that experienced each year when I fast for 24 hours on Yom Kippur. That is almost as much of a mental exercise as it is physical. In that case, I make the decision and muscle through it. I can look forward to breaking the fast and celebrating the New Year with friends and a sumptuous meal.

With this challenge, the hunger is never more than dulled by the little I can afford to eat and greets me each day when I arise. It is a small opportunity to actually experience a chronic state of hunger. It is definitely not fun and there is the sense that hunger itself is just

I don't have to talk the foodstamp challenge as I lived it growing up. But I do have some tips for Leno to help him enjoy his $3 a day.

1) Top Ramen with fresh sliced zuchinni and onion is quite tasty and healthy meal. Plus so cheap.
2) Ditto with mac and cheez. Look for those 5 boxes for $1 sale. With a couple of bucks of veggies you can have 10 meals for less than a buck each.
3) Food for Less, dude.
4) "Ethnic markets", e.g. local cambodian food store and Vallarte supermarket, cater to a poor crowd and don't jack up prices as much.
5) Rice and beans, and not from the can. Buy them in bulk and cook yourself. It's cheap, it's filling and most of the world subsists on it. Add some veggies and Tapatio sauce and you got yourself an authentic meal.

From Larry Wright over at our sister paper, the Detroit News.

Mariel's commentary on Sheriff flak Steve Whitmore reminds me of what I heard on the radio this morning. It was Whitmore insisting that Paris Hilton isn't being released, but "reassigned." (This sounds kind of like the distinction between withdrawing forces from Iraq or "redeploying" them.)

But where, exactly, is Paris being reassigned to?

Answer is her mansion, which, I imagine, is probably like the sort of resorts must of us would pay money to vacation at. That's to say, her punishment is what for most of us would be a vacation.

Hey, if drive while loaded, can I get 40 days in Paris Hilton's mansion, too?

The real question about Paris Hiltons' jail-springing malady is this: Can she get a medical marijuana prescription for it?

From today's page:

Spelling bee finalist Re "French word gardez spells fini for area girl" (June 1):

Thank you for sponsoring the Daily News Regional Spelling Bee! I had fun reading the articles about myself, and I have enjoyed competing in the regional bee for the last four years. The week I spent in Washington, D.C., for the National Spelling Bee was one of the best weeks of my life. I made a lot of new friends and had so much fun, both in the competition and in the other bee-week activities. Thank you so much for making it all possible.

- Emma Manning
Pasadena

And we worried that celebrities would start being held accountable for their scofflaw ways for real! This morning, the LASO released poor Paris after 4 days of county lockup because of a rash or mental illness or something. We don't know becuase they wouldn't tell us anything other than it wasn't a staph infection. Phew!

Here's LASO mouthpiece Steve Whitmore evading reporters questions this morning by confusing them with elaborate hand gestures.

In our lede edit today, we urge the L.A. County supes to be more forthcoming about their new CEO system. Then we mock Rocky Delgadillo's showboating about his supposedly new, awesome, gangster-deportation program that's neither new nor awesome.

On the op-ed side, we've got Thomas Sowell (print only) on liberation, and the CNA's Rose Ann DeMoro praising Michael Moore's "sicko" and calling for national health care. It's a good piece, but for the life of me, I can't understand why DeMoro or, for that matter, Moore, invoke Cuba in their case for socialized medicine. Why give propaganda points to a two-bit dictator whose claims to an excellent health-care system are utterly unverifiable?

What kind of health care is Castro giving to the dissidents languishing in his political prisons? Or the citizens risking their lives to flee his island paradise on rickety rafts?

If you want to make the case for socialized medicine, you'll go a lot further if you stick to the UK and Canada as your examples.

Dear Readers,

Welcome to Friendly Fire, the blog of the Daily News' opinion section.

As the title suggests, this will be a blog of contrasting viewpoints and likely disagreements, but in, we hope, a fraternal spirit. This is how things work here in the DN op/ed department, where we disagree with each other on a good many things, but still manage to get along quite well. (To gauge the extent of our philosophical discord, just witness the intellectual diversity of our communal blogroll!)

The political marketplace (especially on the net) seems to lack much in the way of collegiality, so hopefully this blog will meet a great latent demand.

The contents of Friendly Fire will be as varied as the cast putting it together. To be sure, there will be plenty about the Valley, L.A., and politics, but we don't see ourselves as limited to these subjects. This is an exchange based on all that strikes our fancy. Even things like this:

With a far-flung -- and expanding -- group of contributors, there should always be plenty of worthwhile material here. You can help that along by registering and commenting. We're counting on your comments to enliven this blog, and we're hopeful that some of the material here will be able to find its way back into the print edition, creating the sort of net-print synergy that is the Holy Grail of the journalism industry these days.

So welcome, and expect some changes. We decided it was more important to get this blog up and running than to get it perfect first. Our format will change, as will our contributors, and the content -- well, that will always be evolving. Stick with us. This should be fun.

Best,
Chris Weinkopf
Editorial Page Editor, L.A. Daily News