Speaking of Embassies. . .

BBC News - Tunisia gunmen 'had embassy plan'

Tunisian police have found plans of embassies and explosives after a gun battle with suspected Islamic extremists, the interior minister says.

A list of names of foreign diplomats in the country was also discovered after the 3 January clash in which 12 gunmen were killed, said Rafik Haj Kacem.
. . .
Mr Kacem described the men as "Salafist terrorists" - a reference to the Algerian Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, a radical group opposed to Western [?] which aims to create an Islamic state in Algeria.

It is not clear which embassies or diplomats featured in the seized documents.

Attacking embassies is a good way to get attention, I guess. I'm not sure what it is designed to accomplish beyond that, if anything.

After-thought: Obviously the take-over of the US embassy in Iran accomplished more than simply getting attention. Without knowing what the terrorist involved planned to do with their information, it is hard to fully evaluate the situation.

US Embassy in Athens attacked

MSNBC reports - Rocket slams into U.S. Embassy in Athens

An anti-tank shell was fired at the U.S. embassy early Friday, striking the front of the building but causing no injuries. Greece's Public Order Minister said the blast was probably an act of domestic terrorism, raising fears of resurgent violence by far-left Greek militants.
. . .
Polydoras said police were examining the authenticity of phone calls to a private security company claiming responsibility on behalf of a militant left-wing group.

"There are one or two telephone calls, from unknown callers, who claimed that the Revolutionary Struggle assumes responsibility," Polydoras said. "We cannot rule out that they were genuine."

Revolutionary Struggle claimed responsibility for a May 2006 bomb attack on Culture Minister Giorgos Voulgarakis, in which nobody was injured.

I heard about this story just before going to bed last night, but there were no details at the time. I'm glad to hear that there were no injuries, but acts of terrorism are never really a minor thing. When political actors turn to violence, it is harmful to the democratic process.

And what you didn't hear last night. . .

Via the NYT - Bush Adds Troops in Bid to Secure Iraq

The article reveals:

“If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people,” Mr. Bush declared.

He put it far more bluntly when leaders of Congress visited the White House earlier on Wednesday. “I said to Maliki this has to work or you’re out,” the president told the Congressional leaders, according to two officials who were in the room. Pressed on why he thought this strategy would succeed where previous efforts had failed, Mr. Bush shot back: “Because it has to.”

Yeah, that's democracy at work at Iraq and rational thinking on the part of the President.

H/T: Ratoe in a comment at Poliblog

The article also pointed out:

But on the same page, the report warned that “adding more American troops could conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that the United States presence is intended to be a long-term ‘occupation.’ ”

It seems to me that if the idea is to clear the area of insurgents, maintain the area, and rebuild the area, that is going to require long term occupation. Sometimes what it looks like is what it actually is.

Raising Minimum Wage?

Via WaPo: House Passes Increase in Minimum Wage to $7.25

The House yesterday overwhelmingly approved the first increase in the federal minimum wage in nearly a decade, boosting the wages of the lowest-paid American workers from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour over the next two years.

The 315 to 116 vote could begin the process of ending Congress's longest stretch without a minimum-wage increase since the mandatory minimum was created in 1938. In the past decade, inflation has depleted the value of the minimum wage to the lowest level in more than 50 years.

Not everyone is happy with the idea.

Republican leaders, backed by small-business lobbyists and restaurant groups, argued fiercely that raising the minimum wage would cripple the economy and must be accompanied by significant tax cuts for small businesses to lessen the effect on them. Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.) predicted that a wage increase "will leave recent economic growth dead in its tracks."

There is, however, reason to believe the nay-sayers are wrong. A related article in the New York Times, For $7.93 an Hour, It’s Worth a Trip Across a State Line, suggests:

Nearly a decade ago, when voters in Washington approved a measure that would give the state’s lowest-paid workers a raise nearly every year, many business leaders predicted that small towns on this side of the state line would suffer.

But instead of shriveling up, small-business owners in Washington say they have prospered far beyond their expectations. In fact, as a significant increase in the national minimum wage heads toward law, businesses here at the dividing line between two economies — a real-life laboratory for the debate — have found that raising prices to compensate for higher wages does not necessarily lead to losses in jobs and profits.

I think a minimum wage increase is a good thing. The more money that workers at the lower end of the pay spectrum earn, the more they are going to spend. That is a good thing, isn't it?

Oh, the Irony

Yesterday my oldest son (a senior in high school) received his ACT scores. He is a really intelligent boy, but he has been a real slacker since he started high school, getting As, Bs, and Cs when he could have been a straight A student with minimal effort. Anyway, he got his ACT scores yesterday and he made a 31 composite score! The bad news is, it is too late to apply for a scholarship in the fall. What is a mother to do. . .

The State of Diplomacy

Robert D. Novak has an interesting article in today's Washington Post: The Mess of State
It addresses the move for Negroponte from intelligence to State and talks about the wholesale bailing-out of State officials. It is worth a read.

It is quite scary to me to think about the sad state of the State Department during this time of international crisis when diplomacy is so important. War may be diplomacy by other means, but that doesn't mean it should be our only means.

Presidential Address Commentary

Several things struck me as I listened to Bush speak tonight. First was what a horrible public speaker he is even after 6 years in office, but the others are more important. (The full text of the speech can be found at The Drudge Report.)

Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.

This comment was something of a surprise just because Bush has been so reluctant to admit any mistakes. It is, however, probably the best move he could make for the party as a whole at this point.

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering.

This says to me: "It's gonna look bad, but take my word for it that it's really getting better. Believe what I say, not what you see."

To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.

I thought that in a democracy the outcome of votes in a legislature were the result of debate and the act of the members of the legislature, not the dictates of a foreign president. I guess I was wrong. . .

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

I have to wonder, what exactly does this mean? Especially the "seek out and destroy" part. We obviously can't afford to start wars with two more countries at this point. I certainly hope that is not what he intends.

More commentary can be found at Poliblog and my thanks to Steven for posting a link to the text of the speech so that I didn't have to find it myself.

Update: The video of the speech is available at The Washington Post website

Swearing in

I know this is old news, but it is to facilitate getting information to my sister. Here is a list of the texts Presidents have been sworn in on.

H/T: Poliblog His whole post is definitely worth a read if you are interested in the subject.

Why does he do that?

I have a beautiful fluffy black cat (part Angora, part Manx I was told) who hardly ever goes outside, because he scares very easily. However, when he does go outside, the first thing does is roll around and get completely coated in dirt, sand, and/or pollen (depending on the season). He then comes back inside, carrying nearly a pound of dirt in his fur. Okay, I over exaggerate, but you get the picture. Why does he do this? Does he think I have nothing better to do than clean up after him? UGH! CATS!

A Show of Hand, but little else

NYT - Democrats Plan Symbolic Votes Against Bush’s Iraq Troop Plan

Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they intended to hold symbolic votes in the House and Senate on President Bush’s plan to send more troops to Baghdad, forcing Republicans to take a stand on the proposal and seeking to isolate the president politically over his handling of the war.

I know that symbolism does have some power, and often times symbolic measures can't be distinguished from actual measures in the mind of the population as a whole, but I personally would like to see something more than symbolic gestures come from the new Congress on the Iraq War.

In both chambers, Democrats made clear that the resolutions — which would do nothing in practical terms to block Mr. Bush’s intention to increase the United States military presence in Iraq — would be the minimum steps they would pursue. They did not rule out eventually considering more muscular responses, like seeking to cap the number of troops being deployed to Iraq or limiting financing for the war — steps that could provoke a Constitutional and political showdown over the president’s power to wage war.

I know that politically (and practically) it is difficult to take back what has been given away, but I would love to see the Congress take back much of the war power they have given away over the decades. Not just because of Bush, but because I think an executive with too much power can be a dangerous thing. The founding fathers intended for the people to make the supreme decision on going to war, not one man. It was an important part of the separation of powers that has now been almost completely eroded.

Healthcare for all in California?

NYT - California Plan for Health Care Would Cover All

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday proposed extending health care coverage to all of California’s 36 million residents as part of a sweeping package of changes to the state’s huge, troubled health care system.
. . .
Under Mr. Schwarzenegger’s plan, which requires the approval of the Legislature, California would become the fourth and by far the largest state to attempt near universal health coverage for its citizens. The other three states are Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont.

This seems like an odd move for a Republican governor. Now universal health care could mesh with Republican interests if it took the burden of providing health care off of employers, but this is not what Schwarzenegger's plan does.

The plan, which Mr. Schwarzenegger estimated would cost $12 billion, calls for many employers that do not offer health insurance to contribute to a fund that would help pay for coverage of the working uninsured. It would also require doctors to pay 2 percent and hospitals 4 percent of their revenues to help cover higher reimbursements for those who treat patients enrolled in Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program.

This does not sound like a Republican plan. And the article points out that Republicans in the California legislature are not pleased with the idea.

Mr. Schwarzenegger’s plan includes elements that quickly provoked opposition from many powerful interests, including doctors and the governor’s Republican colleagues in the Legislature.

What this says to me is that Democrats and Republican are not necessarily as diametrically opposed on all issues as some people like to think. A Democratic in one part of the country is not necessarily the same a Democratic in another part of the country, and the same is true of Republicans. (Or I guess it could say that Arnold is really a closet Democrat and Maria is rubbing off on him. )

The article also suggests that this move could put health care firmly in the 2008 Presidential debate. I hope it does. In 2008 we need to remember that while the war in Iraq is important, we still have a country here at home and what happens here matters too. There is more than one type of security to be had in the world. It is true that no one wants another 9-11 to happen, but no one wants to see their children or their other loved-ones sick and not be able to afford medical care. Health care matters. Domestic social issues matter. I hope we all can remember that, Democrats and Republicans alike.

New York Stinks and no one knows why

CNN - Mystery smell settles over Manhattan

New York officials evacuated a number of buildings and shut down some trains after a mysterious gaslike odor was reported Monday.
. . .
Authorities are investigating the source of the smell. Several buildings were evacuated, and the PATH commuter trains along the Sixth Avenue line were temporarily suspended. The odor had no effect on subway service in the city.

Utility company officials said a comprehensive search found no gas leaks.

Steven Jones of the New Jersey Office of Emergency Management said officials were looking at facilities involved in the production of mercaptan, the chemical additive put in otherwise odorless natural gas to gives it a "rotten egg" smell.

Hopefully the authorities are right and there is actually no danger from the smell. However, you have to admit it is a little funny to hear that New York City smells like rotten eggs.

It does seem somewhat odd to me that there could be something causing a smell so pervasive that it can be smelled all the way to Jersey and no one knows what is causing it. It does make one lack confidence in the their ability to secure the area from an actual airborne attack, or even locate it if there were to be one.

Book Review

I thought I'd start posting book reviews of some of the books I read. This weekend I finished reading The Open Spaces of Democracy by Terry Tempest Williams. When we went to the Western Literature Conference in Boise, she was the honored author at the conference. We heard her read some passages from older works (including this one) and she read a chapter from her newest manuscript. Hearing her read from her work prior to reading this book added to the experience of reading it. I could imagine her voice saying the words as I was reading them. Considering that the middle section of the book is almost poetic in form, it seemed fitting to imagine it read in her voice.

The book consists of three somewhat short essays. The first essay focuses on her experience of giving the graduation address at the University of Utah on May 2, 2003. The entire text of the speech is reprinted in the essay. Her speech was political in nature and had a definite liberal angle. The speech was meet with both boos and cheers. Afterward, she had a discussion with a Utah politician (Utah is a conservative state) which later continued through letters between the two. Some of which were also reprinted in the text.

The second essay is something like a journal of her visit to the Arctic and the much disputed 1002 region of the Wildlife Preserve.

The last essay deals with political activism. She discusses her personal experience with land development issues in her own community and her experience observing demonstrations in Italy against U.S. intentions prior to the invasion of Iraq.

The first and last essays were more linear and politically focused. The middle essay was more stream of consciousness and focused on nature, both the human being's place in nature and preservation of open spaces.

The author takes a very environmentally focused view of life and democracy. She equates democracy with the equality and cooperation she sees in the natural world. She also looks to nature as a guide for personal spiritual and even political growth.

Although this book would not be especially useful for scholarly work in political science, it does provide some first hand accounts that could be useful. It is, however, mostly a work of literature, and as such, it is stimulating and intriguing.

Avalanche in Colorado

Via ABC News - Colo. Avalanche Buries, Sweeps Away Cars

A huge avalanche buried several cars and sent others over the edge Saturday on U.S. 40 near 11,307-foot-high Berthoud Pass, Colorado highway officials said.

"Our crews said it was the largest they have ever seen. It took three paths," said Stacey Stegman, spokeswoman for the Colorado Department of Transportation.

My kids love the idea of snow, but they have never had to really deal with it. It is amazing the power that it can have.

A Friday Fun Challenge

It's really only a meme if someone copies it, so I'll just call it a Friday Fun Challenge. Here goes, look at your site meter and see what the last 5 visitors that reached your blog through a search engine were searching for. Here are mine:

1) hida scan
2) nessy - elephant?
3) alabama constitution "amendment 2" autauga county schools 10 mill
4) irrational women in relationships
5) alabama football coach "nick saban"

Join in and let me know what you found. It is always funny to me to see what people are searching for and how they accidentally find me.

Sounds Reasonable to Me

Jim at Coldflame had a pretty good idea. Go check it out.

NNSA Administrator fired

NYT - Administrator Is Dismissed From Nuclear Security Post

The Energy Secretary fired the head of the department’s nuclear weapons program on Thursday, citing a series of security failures at national laboratories, including the discovery of a computer device containing thousands of classified documents in the home of a former worker during a drug raid by the police.

The official who was dismissed, Linton F. Brooks, had been administrator of the National Nuclear Security Agency since May 2003. The agency was established in 2000 because of chronic security problems in the weapons program.
. . .
Describing the gaps revealed by the drug raid, in New Mexico, the new report on the Los Alamos laboratory, a center for nuclear weapons research, concluded, “In a number of key areas, security policy was nonexistent, applied inconsistently, or not followed.”

Obviously, security in our nuclear weapons agency should be a very high priority. We worry that if Iran got nukes they would leak info out to others, but I think we need to get the log out of our own eye first.

Will this move fix the problem? Probably not:

Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a statement on Thursday evening, “While it may be appropriate to begin to address the incessant string of security, safety and management lapses at Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities with the removal of high-level managers, I am afraid that it will take more than a new boss to fix the problems, which are far more systemic and pervasive in nature.”

It is easy to change management, it is much more difficult to fix problems. With this, as with the Iraq issue and the intelligence community issues, more than just a cosmetic change is needed. However, when problematic behaviors become ingrained over time, change can be next to impossible to achieve. Firing Brooks may be necessary and a step in the right direction, I don't know, but certainly more needs to come with it.

My Map

At home on our refrigerator each family member has a map of the US with the states they have visited shaded. Oddly enough, everybody's map is different except for my two youngest boys (and theirs were different until this summer when Middle son finally caught up with Youngest son). A friend told me about a site where you can make the same sort of thing for your blog. Here is mine (I'm actually in the lead at my house).


create your own visited states map


I didn't count states where I have only been at the airport and changed planes. If I did I could add Utah and Ohio.



In this map (which I edited) I added the states I've only landed in (yellow) the states I plan to visit next year (purple), the state I most want to visit but haven't (green)

h/t: Poliblog

Congressional Ethics in the Spotlight

NY Times - Ethics Overhaul Tops the Agenda in New Congress

Democrats, who campaigned relentlessly last year on the theme of a Republican culture of corruption, introduced the proposed ethics rules as part of a week of choreography designed to deliver the message that they did not intend to do business as usual in Washington. In some cases, like restrictions on the use of corporate jets, the rules on gifts and travel by lobbyists go further than what Democrats had pledged earlier.

Another part of the Democrats’ package called for detailed disclosure of pet projects or special-interest tax benefits that individual lawmakers insert into major bills. On Wednesday, President Bush jumped into the debate on such spending projects, called earmarks, urging that their number and cost be cut in half this year, a proposal that Democrats immediately rejected.
. . .
But the ethics rules do not address the most valuable gifts that come from lobbyists and others interested in legislation: campaign donations. And the Democratic Party’s fund-raising machine — revved up by the advantages of being in the majority — continued apace this week with individual members inviting lobbyists and other contributors to a host of events.

I'm glad to see that they are at least planning to make an effort toward ethics reform. I'm not really fond of earmarks, but I'm also aware that they are an integral part of how elected officials get things done for their home states and how they get re-elected. I'm not naive enough to believe they will, or even can, ever go away. I do feel like full disclosure is a step in the right direction.

I do wish that they were more willing to do something about campaign finance reform. The problem is that no one really wants to bite the hand that feeds them. Elected officials want to get re-elected. Money makes the world go 'round. It is a sad but true fact that it is easy to criticize those in charge and say that changes should be made when you are not the ones in charge. It is much harder to actually change things once in charge, especially if it requires changing the very thing that helped you get there in the first place. That is true of campaign finance and electoral rules, and probably many other things in politics as well.

Negroponte to move to State Department

NY Times - Intelligence Chief Is Shifted to Deputy State Dept. Post

John D. Negroponte, whom President Bush installed less than two years ago as the first director of national intelligence, will soon leave his post to become the State Department’s second-ranking official, administration officials said Wednesday.

Mr. Negroponte will fill a critical job that has been vacant for months, and he is expected to play a leading role in shaping policy in Iraq. But his transfer is another blow to an intelligence community that has seen little continuity at the top since the departure of George J. Tenet in 2004 as director of central intelligence.

The article goes on to say:

The administration has had great difficulty filling the State Department position. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has asked several people who have turned down the post, according to senior State Department officials.

I can understand why Negroponte might want to make the switch. My guess, and the article suggests as well, that as a career diplomat Negroponte feels more comfortable in the State Department than in the intelligence community.

To me, the important things illustrated by this move are:
1) the Bush Administration is not good at appointing people to their best possible posts in the first place (I never thought Condi was appropriate as Sec. State, but that's another story I guess)
2) People willing to jump on board a sinking ship are hard to come by
3) the Bush Administration is actually less interested in intelligence reform than they would have us believe. And it could be equally true that Negroponte has realized that intelligence reform is impossible to achieve and just wants to go somewhere that he feels he can actually accomplish something, regardless of what the rank is "on paper."

One of the most interesting things to me about the article is the picture they chose to put with it. The way Bush is standing behind Negroponte in the photo it makes him look rather small and less significant. To me it is just an odd photo.