Bureaucracy in Action, 9:09 PM by Fred

Frequent Bureaucrat by Day poster Peter Glavodevedhzhe now offers a dystopian look back at our modern era in his blog,
In the year 2525: Studies in the pre-global era, 1945-2037.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:37 AM by Fred

What's the point? A 90210 reunion without Tori Spelling? Harumph.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:18 AM by Fred

Pollkatz offers an interesting selection of polls on the Bush presidency. Worth a look, if for no reason other than to realize how poundable the President is in 2004.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 6:01 PM by Fred

Okay, following up, here's an article on CNN, reporting Joe Lieberman's request of the Justice Department to investigate whether accused spy Katherine Leung funneled money from the Chinese government to the Republican party.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 1:52 PM by Fred

It seems I'm not the only one who thought the story about the Edwards campaign noted below was fishy. Intrepid Bureaucrat reader Trapper John's eyebrows were raised when the story first appeared in the Post and he was so curious he wrote the following letter to the Post's ombudsman:

On April 18, the Post published an article by Edsall & Balz on page A1, in which it was revealed that John Edwards' presidential campaign had received donations from individuals who were later reimbursed by their employers.

The article does not reveal why Edsall & Balz chose to contact the specific donors discussed in the story. In fact, in lieu of any other explanation, it appears that the reporters cold-called a few Edwards supporters, on a hunch, to learn whether their donations were to be reimbursed by their employers. It does not appear that any donors to any other campaign were similarly contacted.

Why was the Edwards campaign apparently singled out for what appears to be a fishing expedition? It seems unlikely that the Edwards campaign is alone in receiving conributions from employees who were later reimbursed by their employers -- witness the "executive assistants" at Enron who so generously gave to the Bush campaign in 2000. Was there a precipitating event leading to the phone calls -- a lead regarding these specific donors, perhaps -- or was the story simply a witch hunt that hit paydirt?

Although Trapper didn't expect a response, the Post forwarded his query to Edsall & Belz, whose suspicious response was then forwarded back to Trapper:

We now have sophisticated technical means of examining reports, primarily by putting all the data into an Excel file and then using the system to find out all kinds of information about each candidate's sources of support, and their expenditures. Edwards' report immediately drew our attention because of the large number of $2000 contributors with such jobs as receptionist, legal assistant and paralegal, all working at law firms. On the basis of that, we called the donors and that produced the story in today's paper.

For me, and I'm no conspiracy theorist, it seems just too easy. And, it fails to answer the really big questions: Why was the Edwards campaign targeted in particular? Why was the story about the Edwards campaign, and not simply about a shifty law firm in Arkansas? Doesn't the focus on Edwards play into the GOP strategy of portraying Edwards as an out of touch trial lawyer? Why is the Justice Department, not the FEC, not the local U.S. Attorney, investigating this matter, especially considering the tiny amount of money involved? And, most importantly, why weren't Edsell & Belz attracted to the huge donations from Enron "executive assistants", which were easily obtainable on the F.E.C. website?

Conservative complaints about the "liberal media" just don't pan out when one-sided reporting like this is so widespread. I hope some intrepid reporter follows the money on this one.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:15 AM by Fred

I just stumbled upon this American Prospect article suggesting that Congress amend Title VII to include union organizing as a protected class. It's an interesting suggestion, and ironically timed, considering that I just asked my labor law class a very similar question on their final exam.

On another note, I found this article because I was searching for a documentary about the NLRB. I know of the excellent Barbara Koppel movies, but can anyone suggest any others? Thanks.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 3:28 PM by Fred

TAPPED offers this interesting commentary about how NBC cut off Tim Robbins' interview with Matt Laurer on the Today Show as they discussed free speech in the U.S., literally playing him off with music as if he were a droning Oscar winner.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:26 PM by Fred

Okay, so both NPR and CNN are carrying this story about Justice's investigation into some small-time donors to the Edwards campaign in Arkansas. In a nutshell, a partner at a lawfirm allegedly encouraged employees to donate to the Edwards campaign and told them that they'd be reimbursed for doing so, a clear violation of federal election law. There is no allegation whatsoever, however, that Edwards was in on this, or had any knowledge about the potential wrongdoing.

So many things are troubling about the presence of this coverage, and no one has asked the big questions:

If this is an isolated incident of campaign misconduct, why is it being splattered all over the national press, accompanied by large pictures of John Edwards?

Is anyone concerned that the Justice Department may have intentionally leaked this investigation to the press, especially considering that, just three days ago, the president's political advisors tagged Edwards as one of the two most formidable Democratic candidates?

Why does this minor flare up deserve such major press -- its own spot on NPR and front page coverage on CNN -- when more frightening revelations about GOP fundraisers are relegated to middle-tier coverage and dropped after a day?*

*See stories about the GOP fundraiser who was convicted of taking nude pictures of a 16 year old single mother and high-school dropout here and here (p. B-02 of the Post); see stories about the GOP fundraiser who was actually a double agent for the Chinese government here (GOP connection not mentioned in the Post or the NYT.)

The double standard involved with this inequitable reporting -- and the press' real failure to ask why this piddly story is getting such airplay -- yet again demonstrates Alterman's SCLM thesis. If the media were truly liberal, they would focus on the stories that deserve the attention, and the election law equivalent of a traffic stop simply isn't national news. We need to write newspapers to force them to focus on real issues, instead of these trifles.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:52 AM by Fred

In this interesting article, the BBC's director castigates the American press for its one-sided coverage during the war. He must have read our earlier debate here at Bureaucrat.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:41 AM by Fred

We're getting a new nickel. Explaining why the introduction of a new nickel is "a very historic moment" in American history, Mint Director Henrietta Holsman sagely observed that this is such a historic moment because "[i]t marks the first time in 65 years that Americans will reach into their pockets and pull out newly designed nickels."

Ah, now I have a sense of historical perspective. Thanks, Ms. Holsman!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:35 AM by Fred

I look forward to Krugman like a gap-toothed six-year old looks forward to Santa. Here's today's piece, this time asking the fine question, "[W]hy shouldn't the typical citizen, faced with a choice between Bush-style tax cuts and a plan [like Gephardt's] to provide health insurance to most of the uninsured, choose the latter?"

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 4:21 PM by Fred

This very funny review of Fox's Monica Lewinsky hosted trainwreck Mr. Personality begins with the incredibly pithy line:

"What do you get when you combine Monica Lewinsky, a lonely woman looking for love and twenty guys wearing masks? Oddly enough, bad porn movie is not the correct answer."

And it only gets better. Definitely worth a laugh. As is the show, I'm sure, if you like poison and doggie poo.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:35 PM by Fred

Demonstrating how focused the conservative movement is (see the post from last month about Eric Alterman's speech at Politics and Prose), an obviously-far-right-wing nut posted the following "innocent" question to Gwen Ifill during a Washingtonpost.com online chat:

Gwen. I watch your show regularly and I generally like it, but I notice that most of the columnists are usually biased (although I generally don't like labels) somewhat toward what could be called "Leftist" with pronounced "liberal" views. Like I said, I don't care for labels, but while I do like your show, I think it could benefit from having more people on like Charles Krauthammer, Fred Barnes, or Tony Blankley. These are people I wouldn't really call "Rightists." They are more "Centrist" and not particularly biased either way.

Gwen Ifill: I'm afraid we are going to have to disagree....

Tony Blankley, former press secretary for Newt Gingrich, "centrist"? Fred Barnes, champion of the right wing, "Centrist"? Conservatives are so wonderfully focused on making a right wing agenda a centrist one, and they do a good job at it. As we approach the coming election, progressives need to make sure that their agenda is represented in chats like this, in local letters to the editor, in calls to C-Span. We need to appropriately tag Molly Ivins, Paul Krugman, and other kindred souls with that "Centrist" label to properly pull the debate back to where it belongs.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:08 PM by Fred

This interesting American Prospect article explains how the administration so powerfully controls the flow of information to the press, as part of the article's larger thesis about the free pass given to this administration by the American media.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 6:45 PM by Fred

Eschaton notes that, unless Alabama election law is revised, President Bush will sadly be left off the ballot in 2004. It seems, in the GOP's zeal to postpone the general election campaign as long as possible to capitalize on 9/11 sympathy, the Grand Old Party will miss Alabama's August 31st deadline for nominating a general election candidate. I suspect good ol' W would likely win a write-in vote in Alabama, but it would be fun to make him try. The Dems still control the legislature in Alabama, and there's a fear that they might not be so happy to give the prez a gimme on this one. I'd be curious to hear what Alabaman Sam Heldman has to say on this one...

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:01 AM by Fred

The New York Times offers this interesting profile of Al Pacino, asking the question my friends and I have wondered about for years: When did Al Pacino stop playing roles and start playing an overacted parody of himself? It's an interesting article about a once-great actor who, I think, phones it in more and more these days.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:28 AM by Fred

In the "Fox Guarding the Henhouse Department," the Washington Post reports that the FTC has awarded AT&T subsidiary Government Solutions a huge contract to manage the new National do-not-call registry. This occurred despite the fact that the FCC received more complaints about AT&T telemarketing practices than it received about any other telemarketer. Ironically, the most common complaint about AT&T was that it failed to honor consumer requests to be placed on a do-not-call list. In the understatement of the week, the FTC's spokesperson commented: "The irony of the fact that it was an AT&T subsidiary that won the contract was not lost on us."

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 7:45 PM by Fred

Courtesy of Lars Thorwald, former critic of and now contributor to Bureaucrat by Day, comes Esquire's "Sex Tips from Donald Rumsfeld."

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 6:05 PM by Fred

This very interesting article explains why Jeb Bush's unlawful pre-election 2000 deletion of almost 64,000 eligible African-American and likely Democratic voters got little-to-no play in the American press, despite its widespread dissemination throughout the rest of the world.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:49 PM by Fred

Hey! Bureaucrat by Day is now available at freddyboy.com! Set your browers directly to the freddyboy for more Bureaucrat action.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:34 AM by Fred

E! Online News reports the very exciting happening that

KNIEVEL ROCK OPERA: Evel Knievel signing off on a rock opera that pays homage to the legendary daredevil, reports the AP. Seventies bands including the Who, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd will provide the musical backdrop for Evel Knievel: The Rock Opera.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 4:34 PM by Fred

The Nation offers these seven questions you should ask in considering whether Persian Gulf II has made us safer.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 1:18 PM by Fred

In National Review Online article, Michael Medved blasts Marvel Comics' recent Captain America series, in which Marvel uses the all-american icon to explore the moral ambiguities of our war on terrorism. Medved contends that such thoughtfulness is inappropriate for the genre, claiming that comics' teenaged audience should not be subjected to such anti-american propaganda.

Beyond Medved's erroneous claim that most comic readers are under 18, comics, like film, are a perfect medium to engage in political debate, if for no reason other than the purity of the icons they promote. Deconstructing icons like Captain America, or Superman, or any other star-spangled hero in this time of national doubt gives us the ability to easily contrast the America that should be to the America that is. The recent revival of Captain America is well worth reading, if only to see how icons react to the moral ambiguity we Americans face today.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:17 AM by Fred

Check out this story from Yahoo news: "'Time-Traveler' Busted for Insider Trading." (Unfortunately, the Weekly World News is the story's source, but still, it could be true, right?)

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:43 AM by Fred

I'm posting with my cousin, Hockey Dawg 48, and we're just hanging after a fine Pesach meal of matzo, mazto ball soup (matzo balls made by yours truly), and fine brisket. And, of course, the wonder of being surrounded by family and friends. So, we're likely out of pocket for the rest of the week. Y'all have a great holiday, and we'll check back in next week.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:29 AM by Fred

This re-edit of last January's State of the Union address is magnificent and hilarious. Requires Quicktime AND a fast connection.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:03 AM by Fred

Do eight-year olds have a political voice? And can they speak it in their third grade classroom? This article from the Legal Intelligencer reports that the Third Circuit answered those questions with a resounding "maybe." The decision, which recognizes that little Miss Walker-Serrano certainly enjoys a First Amendment right to speak with her classmates about the animal cruelty they might see during a planned field trip to the circus, but grants her principal the right to restrict her petition gathering during classtime, is available here. (The petition read: "We 3d grade kids don't want to go to the circus because they hurt animals. We want a better feild [sic] trip.")

The decision strikes me as a pretty reasonable accomodation between students' rights and administrator's need for order, particularly in the elementary school setting. The classic Tinker case, involving more mature high school kids, presents a different question altogether. Of course, the underlying question is: Is this a jon-benet situation, where aging activist parents try to live out counter-culture dreams through their kid? Just a thought.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 4:52 PM by Fred

Um, yeah. Put on your pieces of flair and check out this Office Space Soundboard!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:19 AM by Fred

Krugman, as usual, provides an enjoyable rant, this time about Congress's decision to reduce veterans' benefits with one vote, while spouting histrionically zealous patriotic rhetoric in support of our troops with another:

But back to the amazing spectacle of the war's opening, when the House voted to cut the benefits of the men and women it praised a few minutes earlier. What that scene demonstrated was the belief of the Republican leadership that if it wraps itself in the flag, and denounces critics as unpatriotic, it can get away with just about anything. And the scary thing is that this belief may be justified.

For the overwhelming political lesson of the last year is that war works — that is, it's an excellent cover for the Republican Party's domestic political agenda. In fact, war works in two ways. The public rallies around the flag, which means the President and his party; and the public's attention is diverted from other issues.

As long as the nation is at war, then, it will be hard to get the public to notice what the flagwavers are doing behind our backs. And it just so happens that the "Bush doctrine," which calls for preventive war against countries that may someday pose a threat, offers the possibility of a series of wars against nasty regimes with weak armies.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:08 AM by Fred

Bureaucrat is kinda famous! In last Sunday's Washington Post (page H07), the Post mentioned Bureaucrat by Day as one of the interesting blogs on the DCMetroBlogMap. With this coverage, it's only a short step to the front page! (Thanks to Trout for the heads-up.)

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 7:47 AM by Fred

By now, you must know that the Baseball Hall of Fame canceled its celebration of Bull Durham's 15th anniversary because of Tim Robbins' and Susan Sarandon's opposition to the war in Iraq. The Nation publishes this exchange of letters between the Hall of Fame -- whose president has close ties to the administration -- and Robbins, who explains why he believes baseball and opposition to the war are perfectly compatible.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 7:38 AM by Fred

With teaching at my alma mater, a busy time at work, and Passover all on the schedule, look for a light week of posting. But, I'll try to sneak you some hits each day. Here's an interesting article from the American Prospect positing that G.W. Bush is the most dangerous president ever. Hyperbole aside, the prospect hits on one of the truisms of this administration: though it trades in the rhetoric of Reagan, Reagan would never have acted as brazenly as Bush, repeatedly putting the country into financial and international risk. Anyway, check out the article, it's worth a read.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 12:44 PM by Fred

Courtesy of Big Daddy V in Seattle, here's a very thoughtful article by Michael Kinsley entitled "Victory in the war is not victory in the argument about the war," that asks important questions about where we go from here.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 12:35 PM by Fred

Just a reminder: Matt Kohn's Everywhere But Florida: Cognitive Dissonance in Election 2000 shows at Visions this Sunday. Information at this post below. Hope to see you there!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:17 AM by Fred

I'm not sure whether, now that the land war seems to be won, we should all take a moment to breathe and regroup. On both sides, we've spent a lot of time, anger, and energy, arguing over the morality and sensibility of this war. With it (almost) over, it seems like a good idea to step back and take some time to decompress before we launch into an attack on what went right, what went wrong, what kind of precedent we've set, and what's going to happen in Iraq now.

But, if you don't think a breather's needed, check out Krugman's good piece in today's New York Times.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 3:09 PM by Fred

The payoff: Marvel's Epic Comics is back.

After almost a decade of absence, Marvel's groundbreaking Epic Comics will recommence publishing, again with groundbreaking force. For most of comics' history, major comic companies (Marvel and DC included) required creators to relinquish all rights to their creations as a condition of publication. In the early 1980s, however, a stable of smaller, independent comic companies began publishing creator-owned books, allowing comic book writers and artists to retain copyright and trademark in their works. Sensing this trend, Marvel formed Epic Comics, a division dedicated to using Marvel's wide distribution power to publish, promote, and sell creator-owned works. Under the Epic label, Marvel published great books like Marshall Law, Rick Veitch's "The One," and republished smaller successes like Richard and Wendy Pini's Elfquest and Sergio's Groo for wider audiences. As creator owned works became more widespread, and as Marvel became a conglomerate more interested in licensing characters than telling stories, Epic lost its way and ceased publication.

Now, however, Marvel's bringing back Epic. Like a phoenix rising from the flames, Marvel is promoting Epic as a creator's paradise. Under the new Epic banner, creators will have sole control of their books, with no editorial oversight; they'll own full copyright and trademark rights; and, most importantly, Epic will "strive[] for a broader creative scope than Marvel (and other publishers for that matter) so we can publish a wider array of stories than others would." Hopefully, Epic will continue comics' path to mainstream respectability, dealing with storylines and characters -- like "Trouble" below -- beyond the world of men in tights. Moreover, Epic has opened up its doors for public submissions, typically a publishing no-no, to embrace the widest array of subject matter and talent possible. I'm excited about what Epic has to offer, and will try to post about some of its more interesting books as they come out. You should check it out too!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:50 AM by Fred

A tease.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 4:43 PM by Fred

Blogging has power! Thanks to intense criticism, particularly online, the Army is investigating whether an army chaplain did indeed force American soldiers in Iraq to be sermonized and baptized before taking a bath during a water shortage. This Houston Chronicle article reports that "the story generated outrage online" and fomented a sea of e-mails demanding that the army look into the matter. Thanks to Atrios and Off the Kuff for the link.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 4:18 PM by Fred

As we all stand relieved that this war is ending (hopefully?) with little urban warfare and reduced casualties all around (though the overall loss of life is tragically in the thousands), this article, "Bush's Alderaan," contends that Bush has chosen Iraq to demonstrate the awesome power of his own Death Star, i.e., the unchallenged might of the American military:

Once Bush had chosen the site, there was virtually nothing the Iraqi government could do to avoid war, short of total capitulation. As a demonstration of both America’s military might and his own itchy trigger finger, Bush had decided to make Iraq his Alderaan, the hapless planet in the original Star Wars movie that was picked to show off the power of the Death Star.

“Fear will keep the local systems in line, fear of this battle station,” explained Death Star commander Tarkin in the movie. “No star system will dare oppose the emperor now.”

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 3:52 PM by Fred

Trapper John notes that, at San Francisco's Van Bourg, Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld, "associates are a recognized bargaining group within the firm," although not officially unionized. This article has the quote. So, the article noted in the post below describing Parker Stanbury's associate-union as the first of its kind may be technically correct, if not 100% accurate.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:49 PM by Fred

Thanks to Marstonalia, for blogrolling Bureaucrat by Day, and for the fine words about our content. Check out Marston's blog when you have a chance; like the best, it provides intelligent political and cultural criticism worth reading on a regular basis.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 1:46 PM by Fred

The National Law Journal reports that lawyers at Parker Stanbury's Phoenix, Arizona office have voted to unionize, allegedly the first group of private-sector law firm attorneys in the nation to join a union. Lawyers in the public sector and at nonprofits have been doing it for years. I have long thought that private-sector lawyers could also use a good union or two.

Since the 1980s, pressures on law firm lawyers to act like businessmen rather than attorneys have reduced lawyer quality of life as dramatically as they've increased our salaries. Other professionals -- doctors, nurses, computer technicians, and exotic dancers -- are beginning to unionize over quality of life issues, and the lawyers at Parker Sanbury are no exception. Their beefs with management include, not only low wages, but also no law library, limited internet resources, production quotas, and office space. The Teamsters represent the Parker Stanbury attorneys for the purpose of collective-bargaining; let's hope they bust some heads -- metaphorically, of course -- and get these lawyers a strong contract.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 5:21 PM by Fred

An old law school colleague (I think I've guessed who it is), offered this comment in response to a post below:

Speaking of liberal...

I have been reading Fred's blog for several months now, as well as the comments posted in response to some of the articles. I have always found Fred to be an enlightened, extraordinarily personable guy. I went to law school with Fred. And I knew he was liberal. But...

Let me insert this, before I am run out of town on a rail for being a right-wing conservative nutjob who has a "love it or leave it" attitude, who owns gun racks, who embraces Jerry Falwell as a "centrist" and Pat Buchanan as a "leftist sympathizer" and who refers to the Civil War as "the war of northern aggression": I am a married father with a respectable job at a law firm, I do a healthy amount of pro-bono work for proressive organizations (last year 400 hours), am a registered Democrat in Maryland, reside in Baltimore where I routinely assist in neighborhood campaign drives to clean the streets and get Martin O'Malley more $$$ and am a good citizen. I don't drive a pick-up, I laugh just as hard as anyone at chaw-chewing rednecks who think the confederate flag is respectable and worthy of display on the back of a Chevy, and my radio is usually tuned to NPR.

In reading this blog, I have found my brows raised several times at the level of genuine animosity that I heretofore would never have expected from Fred. Or from anyone, I guess. Well, not anyone. I guess I expect it from Michael Moore.

And here's the problem with that. Dissent is good. Dissent is essential. I don't have to quote to those reading this the statements on this subject by the likes of greater minds than ours who founded this nation. You know them, hopefully by heart. But the problem with the extreme left of this world is the same as the problem with the extreme right: no perspective. Both confuse stridency with passion. They take advice and opinion as information. And this can be dangerous.

Reading this blog is exactly like reading the Drudge Report, or listening to O'Reilly, or reading a speech by Bob Barr. Except that the wind is just blowing the other way.

Listen, I implore you to avoid becoming that thing you railed against when conservatives were going after Clinton. Do not let your hate overshadow your perspective. Yet that is what you are all doing. You all complain to each other about how we need "regime change," how Bush is "evil" and "a criminal" and how he is utterly without any redeeming values whatsoever, and how the same goes for the Republican Party. And what happens then is this: When you post your commitment to hoping for the best outcome in the war but also your commitment to hold Bush responsible for any miscalculation, it comes across as a dirty little secret prayer, an ember of dark hope deep within you that tells others that you kind-of, sort-of, maybe want to see things go bad so you can stick it to the guy you hate.

And then you become Bob Barr. Or Tom DeLay. Or Dick Armey.

The goal of dissent is not to convince those who are of like minds. They are already convinced. The only rational goal of dissent is to convince those who think differently. And you can only do so with perspective. Stridency is not passion. Opinion is not information.

The Fred I went to school with had perspective in abundance, and passion, and--Lord, yes--information. That Fred recognized the wisdom of Yoda not to turn to hatred or anger, employed the rationality of a Mike Brady who carefully explains, and embraced the use of political subtlety and nuance like Sid & Marty Kroft.

Somehow, somewhere, that Fred turned into just another Matt Drudge. Another Bob Barr. Another Bill O'Reilly.

I hope for the return of the Fred I knew.

I hope for the return of that Fred.

Lars, age brings some people to the middle; perhaps that's what's happened to you. Others, it pushes to the edge. As it becomes clear to me, you simply don't understand the role that passion on the edge plays, and the role of this page to encourage it.

With all due respect, I'm not a journalist. My job here isn't to provide facts and draw inferences from those facts in a measured presentation. I do that enough as an attorney.

The facts are out there. I link to articles that do the research, put forth the facts, and tell the truth. And, I don't purport to speak anything but opinion, unlike a Drudge, O'Reilly, or Barr, who spout untruth and call it solemn fact.

My job here is merely to say what I feel. What my heart tells me. What's moral, and what's right. We liberals, for too long, have lived in worlds of nuance, worlds where we view every argument in shades of grey. Having done so is a testament to the intellectual base of our movement, and to the fact that we approach the world with an open mind, cognizant that debate is good, and that the world often isn't easily categorized.

But, we liberals have ceded the dialogue of morality -- of outrage -- to conservatives. And that's wrong. Because, as I said in a post today, we've got a lot to be angry about. Invective aside, the current administration has been a disaster for Americans: We've squandered our international reputation, showed a disdain for the international institutions we labored to build, erased our budgetary surplus, amassed a huge deficit to support unnecessary tax cuts that favor the wealthy, shamelessly used the tragedy of September 11 to justify an unprecedented invasion of civil liberties, abandoned our support for environmental protections, and begun labeling citizens who have the courage to dissent "anti-american." The last two years have been a tragedy for our nation, and we should be furious.

And we should tell people how furious we are. Conservatives think they've cornered the market on anger. On self-righteousness. On indignancy. But they haven't. The more of us progressives who express our outrage, the more we bring the debate back to the real center, where it belongs. Our job -- all of our jobs, even SUV driving Baltimore liberals -- is to let the administration know how upset we are. To let them know there's another voice out there, beyond the tepid mainstream media. That there's a grassroots movement that's unhappy with what's become of the country we love so much. And to let other people know that it's okay to dissent, passionately, loudly, angrily.

The nuanced Fred still exists. He's still here. But the time for reasoned Lincoln-Douglas debates with pro- and con- is past. It's a time for anger, excitement, and passion. And this blog is the perfect place to do so. As I have written before, blogs are the new broadsheets. So, I'll continue to get excited, to present links with articles and opinions, and attempt to get you worked up. If you disagree with my stridency, write a comment that substantively addresses how I'm wrong. But I'm going to keep poking. Because poking makes people think. Makes you read the articles I link to and think about whether they're right or wrong. And, if you're still the same progressive you were, it makes you say, "maybe Fred's gone too far, but I can see why he's so angry." And that's enough to get a movement rolling.

Oh, and Lars? If you really miss that old Fred, you should give me a call for lunch. You work around the corner, yet I haven't seen you in five years.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 3:14 PM by Fred

Just got back from a great American Constitution Society lawyer's lunch, featuring Ruth Harlow of the Lambda Legal Defense Fund discuss Lawrence v. Texas, a lower court decision so embarassing that no one but the redneck district attorney of Harris County, Texas wanted to defend it. We were all optimistic that the Supreme Court will reverse Texas's decision to criminalize the consentual intimate relationship of two adults, so the atmosphere in the room was pretty upbeat.

Had the opportunity to meet some other bloggers, Jason, Sam, and Steph. Sam made the brilliant point that we tend to blog that which makes us angry, and it's true. I started out this blog with a mix of pop culture references, light stories, and some political observations. Now, it's unfortunately almost all political. I do think that's a result of the present day: We live in a world dominated by the depressing -- this war, this deficit, this renegade administration. But, I think I'll make an effort to write about things that please me as much as things that upset me. We all need a bit of light -- including this blogger -- so, in between the war rants, I'll try to throw in some fun too. We'll see where it takes us.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:57 AM by Fred

Thanks to my work colleague for pointing out this wonderful "correction" in today's New York Times:

An article in Business Day yesterday about the influence of Rupert Murdoch on the News Corporation's properties misidentified the Fox News Channel commentator who accused competitors of dwelling on casualties in Iraq and misstated the term he used for them. He was Fred Barnes, not Bill O'Reilly; he called the competitors "weenies," not "liberal weenies."

Glad we've got that sorted out.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 1:19 PM by Fred

Next Sunday, April 13th, Visions Cinema in DC will host a screening of filmmaker Matt Kohn's documentary about the 2000 election, "Everywhere but Florida." Visions' website offers this description of Matt's film:

Everywhere But Florida: Cognitive Dissonance in Election 2000 begins when the vote-counting stopped and where mainstream media coverage ended. From a twenty-state tour of the people on the streets and even your own grandmother in her kitchen to groundbreaking journalist Greg Palast to constitutional scholars like Alan Dershowitz and Judge Richard Posner duking out the Supreme Court Decision in Bush v. Gore, Everywhere But Florida explores the implications of the most controversial election in U.S. History and gives some suggestions about what we have to do now.

For information about the program and Visions, click this link. This'll be another Bureaucrat by Day field trip, so if you'd like to go, let me know!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:55 AM by Fred

Driving down Interstate 95 outside the beltway this weekend, my girlfriend and I noticed several large electronic bulletin boards flashing the message: "Report Terrorism? Call 866-488-8554." I postulated whether, in a fit of patriotism, I should call to inform them that I am personally aware of a gentleman in Washington, D.C. who has put the lives of 250,000 Americans and countless other nationalities at risk to sate personal hubris and fulfill a radical political agenda. What do you think?

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:54 AM by Fred

Kinda creepy privacy alert: I received this e-mail today. Normally, I discard such missives as urban legends, but, this time at least (despite the hyperbolic prose), the e-mail is right -- googling your phone number will bring up your name, address, and directions to your home. It's a stalker's dream come true! If you want to protect your privacy, follow the e-mail's instructions to remove your personal information from the google search engine:

INSTRUCTIONS FOR REMOVING YOUR TELEPHONE NUMBER FROM GOOGLE'S TELEPHONE SEARCH DATABASE:

Go to www.google.com then type in your phone number (including area code) and click on Google Search. If your phone number is listed it will show your name and address and give you two map options. Yahoo and MapQuest.

Check to see how accurate the map is to your home!

Any person wishing to discover the physical location of a phone number, be it a home or business address, can use this feature to locate a physical street address, and receive directions on how to get there from anywhere in the country. In the age of the internet communication we all know the dangers of this - for adults and CHILDREN!

Google has made available an option that will allow anyone to REMOVE their telephone number from the database that is linked to the mapping feature.

You will first need to check if your number is listed in this manner by attempting a search-entering your full telephone number (including area code).

If the number appears in the mapping database, an icon resembling a telephone will appear next to the first or second entry on the results page. Clicking on this icon will take you to a page containing a description of the service, and a link to request that your telephone number be removed from the Google database.

Type in the information requested and SUBMIT.

So far unlisted numbers and cell phone numbers, do not show up.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:50 AM by Fred

Telling it like it is: A German writer explains why, in light of its history, Germany rightly fought against Bush's Iraq war.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:44 AM by Fred

Thanks to JURIST's Paper Chase for including Bureaucrat by Day on its Blawgdex! Welcome to any visitors traveling here from Jurist's great legal news clearinghouse, hope you find your stay enjoyable.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:32 AM by Fred

I'm just so pissed, I'll repeat Atrios' entire post:

OUTRAGE

This makes me so goddamn livid I can't even think straight.

Posted on Fri, Apr. 04, 2003

Army chaplain offers baptisms, baths

BY MEG LAUGHLIN
mlaughlin@herald.com

CAMP BUSHMASTER, Iraq - In this dry desert world near Najaf, where the Army V Corps combat support system sprawls across miles of scabrous dust, there's an oasis of sorts: a 500-gallon pool of pristine, cool water.

It belongs to Army chaplain Josh Llano of Houston, who sees the water shortage, which has kept thousands of filthy soldiers from bathing for weeks, as an opportunity.

''It's simple. They want water. I have it, as long as they agree to get baptized,'' he said.

And agree they do. Every day, soldiers take the plunge for the Lord and come up clean for the first time in weeks.

''They do appear physically and spiritually cleansed,'' Llano said.

First, though, the soldiers have to go to one of Llano's hour-and-a-half sermons in his dirt-floor tent. Then the baptism takes an hour of quoting from the Bible.

''Regardless of their motives,'' Llano said, ``I get the chance to take them closer to the Lord.''

(via the Horse)

Fucking hell. As the letter writer to MWO says:

So, if you are a desperately thirsty Jewish soldier, do you have to accept Christ to get a juice box from this "man of God"?

Fucking hell.

-Atrios

Just so you don't think this is an urban legend, here's the link to the original Miami Herald story.

This utter abuse of power -- from an army chaplin who's supposed to be ministering to all, regardless of religion or belief -- demonstrates exactly how this administration has inappropriately given evangelicals official standing to run the government. Another reason to complain to your congressperson, the ACLU, or whoever will listen. Only we can stop this unconstitutional abuse of power.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 6:42 PM by Fred

LEGO's Star Wars page has scenes from the Star Wars movies animated with lego pieces and characters!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:53 AM by Fred

From Unbillable Hours (under the hilarious heading "snoochie boochie, dipshit") comes this tip off that Clerks' star Jason Mewes was ordered by a New Jersey court to complete probation or serve jail time for his heroin conviction several years ago. Now, I like Jay and Silent Bob as much as the next guy, but when will his 15 minutes end? Isn't it about time we see Mewes, clean, sober and born again, selling ladies' undergarments at J.C. Penney's? I'm getting anxious here, boys.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 6:12 PM by Fred

A bit of fun amid the bleak news: In this article, CNN runs down all the comic book related movies coming this summer, and there are so many! From predictable hits like "X2" and "Matrix Reloaded," to more obscure flicks, "the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" and "American Splendor," it's a loaded summer. Personally, I'm most excited about Ang Lee's The Hulk. With Lee at the helm, the film is sure to capture the pathos, pain, punch, and power that the Hulk's tragic Jeckyll/Hyde story deserves. Another Bureaucrat by Day field trip in the making...

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 9:32 AM by Fred

NPR's All Things Considered offers this particularly interesting audio War Diary. The piece presents a conversation between a young peace protestor in Portland who's trying to engage a pro-war demonstrator in conversation about why they're both standing outside in the cold. To me, it reflects everything that drives me crazy about the conservative approach to the war: unintellectual, uninterested in dialogue, utterly convinced that protesters -- who, after all, are trying to prevent American soldiers from dying horrible deaths in battle -- are anti-American and anti-troops. It's like Alterman says: liberals are all about nuance, conservatives disdain it. The young woman earnestly attempting to speak with her pro-war counterpart gets shut out -- completely -- because she recognizes the war is not a matter of moral absolutes. It's a really interesting listen.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:54 AM by Fred

Kev Star sent me the following invitation, which I thought might be of interest to you all:

Hi again:

I've just been invited to join the Wellstone Action Network, an advocacy group recently set up by the late senator's sons as a way of carrying on his good work using his proven methods. I urge you all to join their mailing list or give money to get them off the ground. [Click here for the link.] Warren Beatty and Robert Redford are on the advisory board, so you can't go wrong!

They sponsor something called Camp Wellstone for training citizen activists. Anyone else interested in going? I anticipate it being Snoopy meets Robert LaFollette, with a little Emma Goldman (the free love aspect if we're lucky) thrown in.

Anyway, I return you to your e-activities...

We all miss Paul Wellstone, one of the few voices in public life with the courage to stand for principle, and speak out against injustice. At the very least, check out this site and help support his legacy.

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:35 AM by Fred

Courtesy of Bloglet, you can now sign up to receive a daily e-mail from Bureaucrat by Day! [Sign up box in the bottom left.] The email will let you know whether we've updated the site in the last 24 hours, and give you a direct link to the new posts. And, for those of you who are concerned about privacy (as I am), Bloglet promises that it will not give your e-mail address out to anyone. (If Bloglet's good enough for privacy advocate Fred Ox, it's good enough for me.) Hope you check it out!

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 7:32 AM by Fred

The always brilliant Onion gives us this great essay about patriotism entitled, "I Should Not Be Allowed To Say The Following Things About America." Thanks to Veruca Assault for another super tip.

The Onion also offers this headline: "Bush Thought War Would Be Over By Now."

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:19 PM by Fred

Thanks to Eric Alterman's Altercation, we've got this great link from McSweeney's: "Possible Follow-up Songs for One-Hit Wonders."

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 2:44 PM by Fred

Yay! Blogger's up again! Sorry, folks, haven't been able to post anything to the site today, as Blogger's been offline since this morning. But there's lots for you to read now...

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 11:59 AM by Fred

Peter Jackson's remaking King Kong! Need I say anything else?

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 10:35 AM by Fred

Just like a good magician, the GOP focuses your attention on the left hand while it tricks you with the right: You may have noticed the link in the bottom left to PADDA, the People with Attentional and Developmental Disabilities Association, located in my hometown of Newport News, Virginia. PADDA advocates in the public schools on behalf of children with special needs, helping parents and students navigate through the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA), the maze of federal special education law.

The day the war started last week, congressional Republicans introduced their bill to reauthorize IDEA, attempting to use the cover of war to decimate the act. The bill, not surprisingly, guts many of IDEA's most important provisions, including protections against unilateral expulsion of students with disabilities, funding for parent-community resource centers like PADDA, and major requirements of a student's individualized education plan. At the same time, it imposes a "gag rule" on employees of parent resource centers, prohibiting them from engaging in any sort of legislative activity at any level to better the lives of special needs students, and it allows states to experiment by modifying IDEA provisions.

Five years ago, the consideration of IDEA was long, drawn-out, thorough, and well-considered. And, although the result of political compromise, the final reauthorization still protected students with special needs and their parents, while providing federal funding for groups like PADDA to ensure that IDEA constituencies understood the law. Now, however, the House Education committee has already planned a hearing and markup on the bill barely one week after it was first introduced!

PADDA has posted a letter by Congressman George Miller (D-CA) listing the most extreme changes, and a link to a side by side comparison of the current law and the proposed changes. [Also, here is a press release from Congressman Miller's office on IDEA.] Please write, call, or email your representative today to tell him or her (1) To vote against these radical changes in IDEA, and (2) To refuse the GOP's attempt to rush this important bill through in a time of war. Give IDEA the real deliberation this most important of laws deserves!

[UPDATE: You can click this link to send an email directly to your representative.]

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 8:26 AM by Fred

In this week's Nation, Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood writes a phenomenal Letter to America. The Nation doesn't have it online, but someone else was nice enough to transcribe it, and I'll do the same for you here. Of course, copyright goes to the proper owner, not to me:

A letter to America

By MARGARET ATWOOD

Dear America:

This is a difficult letter to write, because I'm no longer sure who you are.

Some of you may be having the same trouble. I thought I knew you:
We'd become well acquainted over the past 55 years. You were the
Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck comic books I read in the late 1940s.
You were the radio shows -- Jack Benny, Our Miss Brooks. You were the
music I sang and danced to: the Andrews Sisters, Ella Fitzgerald, the
Platters, Elvis. You were a ton of fun.

You wrote some of my favourite books. You created Huckleberry Finn,
and Hawkeye, and Beth and Jo in Little Women, courageous in their
different ways. Later, you were my beloved Thoreau, father of
environmentalism, witness to individual conscience; and Walt Whitman,
singer of the great Republic; and Emily Dickinson, keeper of the
private soul. You were Hammett and Chandler, heroic walkers of mean
streets; even later, you were the amazing trio, Hemingway,
Fitzgerald, and Faulkner, who traced the dark labyrinths of your
hidden heart. You were Sinclair Lewis and Arthur Miller, who, with
their own American idealism, went after the sham in you, because they
thought you could do better.

You were Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront, you were Humphrey Bogart
in Key Largo, you were Lillian Gish in Night of the Hunter. You stood
up for freedom, honesty and justice; you protected the innocent. I
believed most of that. I think you did, too. It seemed true at the
time.

You put God on the money, though, even then. You had a way of
thinking that the things of Caesar were the same as the things of
God: that gave you self-confidence. You have always wanted to be a
city upon a hill, a light to all nations, and for a while you were.
Give me your tired, your poor, you sang, and for a while you meant
it.

We've always been close, you and us. History, that old entangler, has
twisted us together since the early 17th century. Some of us used to
be you; some of us want to be you; some of you used to be us. You are
not only our neighbours: In many cases -- mine, for instance -- you
are also our blood relations, our colleagues, and our personal
friends. But although we've had a ringside seat, we've never
understood you completely, up here north of the 49th parallel.

We're like Romanized Gauls -- look like Romans, dress like Romans,
but aren't Romans -- peering over the wall at the real Romans. What
are they doing? Why? What are they doing now? Why is the haruspex
eyeballing the sheep's liver? Why is the soothsayer wholesaling the
Bewares?

Perhaps that's been my difficulty in writing you this letter: I'm not
sure I know what's really going on. Anyway, you have a huge posse of
experienced entrail-sifters who do nothing but analyze your every
vein and lobe. What can I tell you about yourself that you don't
already know?

This might be the reason for my hesitation: embarrassment, brought on
by a becoming modesty. But it is more likely to be embarrassment of
another sort. When my grandmother -- from a New England background --
was confronted with an unsavoury topic, she would change the subject
and gaze out the window. And that is my own inclination: Mind your
own business.

But I'll take the plunge, because your business is no longer merely
your business. To paraphrase Marley's Ghost, who figured it out too
late, mankind is your business. And vice versa: When the Jolly Green
Giant goes on the rampage, many lesser plants and animals get
trampled underfoot. As for us, you're our biggest trading partner: We
know perfectly well that if you go down the plug-hole, we're going
with you. We have every reason to wish you well.

I won't go into the reasons why I think your recent Iraqi adventures
have been -- taking the long view -- an ill-advised tactical error.
By the time you read this, Baghdad may or may not look like the
craters of the Moon, and many more sheep entrails will have been
examined. Let's talk, then, not about what you're doing to other
people, but about what you're doing to yourselves.

You're gutting the Constitution. Already your home can be entered
without your knowledge or permission, you can be snatched away and
incarcerated without cause, your mail can be spied on, your private
records searched. Why isn't this a recipe for widespread business
theft, political intimidation, and fraud? I know you've been told all
this is for your own safety and protection, but think about it for a
minute. Anyway, when did you get so scared? You didn't used to be
easily frightened.

You're running up a record level of debt. Keep spending at this rate
and pretty soon you won't be able to afford any big military
adventures. Either that or you'll go the way of the USSR: lots of
tanks, but no air conditioning. That will make folks very cross.
They'll be even crosser when they can't take a shower because your
short-sighted bulldozing of environmental protections has dirtied
most of the water and dried up the rest. Then things will get hot and
dirty indeed.

You're torching the American economy. How soon before the answer to
that will be, not to produce anything yourselves, but to grab stuff
other people produce, at gunboat-diplomacy prices? Is the world going
to consist of a few megarich King Midases, with the rest being serfs,
both inside and outside your country? Will the biggest business
sector in the United States be the prison system? Let's hope not.

If you proceed much further down the slippery slope, people around
the world will stop admiring the good things about you. They'll
decide that your city upon the hill is a slum and your democracy is a
sham, and therefore you have no business trying to impose your
sullied vision on them. They'll think you've abandoned the rule of
law. They'll think you've fouled your own nest.

The British used to have a myth about King Arthur. He wasn't dead,
but sleeping in a cave, it was said; in the country's hour of
greatest peril, he would return. You, too, have great spirits of the
past you may call upon: men and women of courage, of conscience, of
prescience. Summon them now, to stand with you, to inspire you, to
defend the best in you. You need them.

[Just noticed this piece is also available online here in Toronto's Globe and Mail.]

File a comment:

Bureaucracy in Action, 7:53 AM by Fred

Okay, a bit more on the post about DC Comics below. The Winter Brothers are suing DC Comics for publishing a horror cowboy book featuring villians called "the Autumn Brothers," described as "long-haired, half-worm, half-human albino villains who live underground in the Old West, eating raw pig brains and ripping the heads off livestock," not the most flattering portrait. The boys' comic book dopplegangers look like this:

The question for the California Supreme Court is very simply: "Is this constitutionally protected parody, or gross defamation and misappropriation of image?"

My money's on DC Comics to prevail. This case is just too close to the Supreme Court's Hustler Magazine v. Fallwell, in which the Supreme Court recognized the constitutionally protected nature of parody -- even a parody featuring public figure Jerry Fallwell fornicating drunk with his mother in an outhouse. Here, DC Comics has clearly parodied (homaged?) the eerie persona that the Winter Brothers -- two albino rockers -- have traded on. There's no possibilty of confusion, and no one's buying this comic, Jonah Hex: Riders of the Worm and Such, because there's a veiled reference to the Winter Brothers in it. Shoot, I think I read this book, and no one should have been buying the comic anyway. Strike up a win for DC Comics.

File a comment: