Fern R's blog

Cystic Fibrosis is a terrible disease. Some of you may remember that a fellow political blogger, Dean Barnett, died of cystic fibrosis earlier this year. It is a genetic disease affecting the lungs, liver, pancreas, and intestines, causing progressive disability. There is no cure for cystic fibrosis, and most individuals with the disease die young. The average lifespan for people with cystic fibrosis is 36 years. It is the number one genetic killer in the U.S.

So, it would seem that it would be a nice thing to raise money to fund cystic fibrosis research, right? The answer depends on your world view. If you are a normal person who is compassionate towards those who are suffering, then you would gladly support those who wish to raise money for cystic fibrosis research. But if you see the world through race-filtered glasses, then cystic fibrosis isn't a diverse enough disease. It disproportionately affects Caucasians. And since white people are evil, it is surely a bad thing to try and raise money for research for a disease that affects them more than the so-called historically disadvantaged races.

So said the students of a university in Ottawa. The Carleton University Students' Association has voted to drop a cystic fibrosis charity as the beneficiary of its annual Shinearama fundraiser because the disease is not "inclusive" enough. They voted nearly unanimously in favor of the motion that disparaged cystic fibrosis as "only affect[ing] white people, and primarily men."

It's not surprising that in their rush to disassociate themselves with that evil white person's disease, the students of Carleton University didn't bother to check their facts. Cystic Fibrosis affects men and women in similar numbers, and while Caucasians are more likely to be afflicted with it than non-Caucasians, the term "Caucasian" includes more than just "white" people. You'd expect better from our supposed "best and brightest." Especially considering that the motion to change the beneficiary of the film festival was made by a science student. But quite clearly being college educated is not synonymous with intelligence.

Only one student present voted against the motion. A shining beacon of hope for sanity on college campuses, the lone dissenter, Nick Bergamini said, "I think they see this, in their own twisted way, as a win for diversity. I see it as a loss for people with cystic fibrosis." No kidding.

Mumbai, India has been hit by a series of shootings, vehicle explosions and grenade attacks targeted in the "swanky" Colaba District. At least seven incidents occurred. The terrorists opened fire indiscriminately. At least some of the gunman are holed up in the Taj Mahal and Oberoi hotels. Apparently the gunman were seeking out American and British tourists. One hospital is reporting at least 60 dead and 200 injured.

I just watched the Congressional Democrat press conference where they unveiled their strategy for going forward with the auto industry crisis. Leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, said it best, "Show us the plan and we'll show you the money." They're demanding accountability and a plan for long term viability of the American automotive industry before giving them any tax payer money. I think this is a really smart strategy to move forward, and I am heartened to see Congress taking their fiduciary duty to the American tax payers seriously. My personal preference would be to let the companies go bankrupt, but I don't think that's going to happen, so this is an acceptable second option for me.

In the plan the Big 3 auto companies come up with, I'd like to see serious changes to executive compensation plans. I don't understand why a board member or high level manager should get ridiculous bonuses and outlandish benefits when they are doing a bad job running the company. No more golden parachutes. No more bonuses when your company is in the toilet. No more private jet rides to Washington to beg for money. If you are doing a horrible job running your company, you can ride in coach like the rest of us.

I'd also like to see a renegotiation of the automotive industry's labor contracts. The benefits, pensions and salaries paid in Detroit are not in line with typical American compensation packages. For example, UAW's total compensation works out to $70/hour for older workers, while Toyota would pay a similar worker $40/hour in combined compensation. I don't see how American auto makers can compete if they are paying their workers such high salaries. They're totally out of line with industry standards. Not to mention typical American salaries, health benefits packages and retirement benefits plans.

What would you like to see in the Big 3 Auto companies plan?

A recent Zogby poll showed that 88% of Obama voters didn't know that Obama's energy plans were designed to bankrupt the coal industry. That same Zogby poll showed that 56% of Obama voters didn't know that Obama started his political career in the home of Bill Ayers, a Weather Underground domestic terrorist. 72% of Obama's voters didn't know that Biden had previously quit his presidential campaign after it was shown that he was plagiarizing the speeches of a British politician. And 47% didn't know that Biden predicted that an Obama administration would be tested within the first six months by a generated international crisis.

Perhaps most insulting of all, 57% of Obama supporters didn't know that it was the Democrats who controlled Congress the past 2 years. Apparently, many Americans were angry at Congress's ineffectiveness and then took it out on the wrong party.

Part of this poll is, I am sure, the result of people who don't normally pay attention to politics and don't normally vote, voting for Obama. But the results are truly depressing. It is embarrassing that such a huge number of Americans don't even know which party controls the House and Senate. The GOP has only itself to blame for those seats lost in Congress. Clearly the Republican Party wasn't even able to get the message out the we have the Democrats--not the Republicans--to blame for the last 2 years of complete and utter failure in Congress. And perhaps, if McCain had done a better job educating voters, he'd be President Elect instead of Senator.

Ms. Etheridge claims that because Prop 8 (constitutionalizing the traditional definition of marriage) passed, she has lost one of the rights of full citizenship, and therefore shouldn't have to pay taxes.

Good luck with that.

Beyond being a really dumb argument that won't have the effect Ms. Etheridge wants, citizenship status has no bearing on your obligation to pay taxes on income earned in California.

The Orange County Register (the newspaper of note in Orange County, CA) has announced that it will be outsourcing the copy editing of some of its articles to...you guessed it, India.

Mindworks' Web site says the company is based outside New Delhi and provides "high-quality editorial and design services to global media firms ... using top-end journalistic and design talent in India."

Editors at Mindworks will work five shifts a week for one month, performing layout for the community paper and editing some stories in the flagship Register, Fabris said. Staffing at the company will not be affected, he said.

Fabris did not specify which community newspaper would be laid out by Indian designers.

The OC Register has been having a rough time of it, not unlike other newspapers and dinosaur media sources. The Register's problem is definitely not an ill perceived media bias as the paper's libertarian/conservative bent matches the political persuasion of most of Orange County (the OC GOP touts the OC as the most Republican county in the country).

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, although it is decidedly bad news for recent Journalism and English graduates. Welcome to the new job market guys!

Marketing genius Seth Godin has an email checklist that a few of my local politicians would do well to read. But then again, I get the distinct impression that the particular politicians in question are new to "the internets" and probably don't read Seth's blog. Too bad, I think a lot of politicians could learn something from his approach.

Numbers four, five and six are particularly apropos:

4. Did every person on the list really and truly opt in? Not like sort of, but really ask for it?
5. So that means that if I didn't send it to them, they'd complain about not getting it?
6. See #5. If they wouldn't complain, take them off!

Lured by the Yahoo! headline "Why Hillary Lost," I clicked. But I don't think I agree with the AP's Beth Fouhy. She posits that Hillary's downfall was caused by her vote to authorize the Iraq war over six years ago:

Her refusal to admit error failed to satisfy Tilton, a 46-year-old financial analyst from Nashua even though he loved her position on health care and capping Iraq troop levels.

That exchange, pounced upon by some reporters to the displeasure of Clinton's aides, foreshadowed her demise. Her refusal to back off that vote tied her to the past and to an unpopular war. It embodied her campaign's fundamental miscalculation: the decision to present her as the standard-bearer for Washington experience, ready for office on Day One.

Maybe I am forgetting something, but it didn't seem to me that the major issue of the Democratic primary was Hillary's vote to authorize it in 2002. I don't even think it foreshadowed anything, as Fouhy suggests (it's easy to find foreshadowing when you're looking with hindsight). From my vantage point, it seemed that Hillary's statement regarding Iraq ("If I had known then what I know now...") satisfied most Democrats, especially since she appears committed to ending the war. Fouhy goes on to list other problems with Hillary's campaign:

By itself, Clinton's Iraq vote didn't cost her the nomination. There were other culprits: her ever-changing campaign themes, poor financial planning, squabbling staff and a field organizing plan designed for quick victory rather than a 50-state delegate hunt.

It seems to me that the first item listed above--her every-changing campaign theme--was a bigger problem than Hillary's refusal to admit that, at the time she made the decision, she had enough info to vote against the war in Iraq. People don't want to vote for someone who appears to have no idea why it is they want to be President (other than for the love of power), and I think that was Hillary's biggest problem.

What do you guys think caused the downfall of Hillary's campaign?

Christian Evangelist Pat Robertson may not have said that Hurricaine Katrina was caused by the Academy Awards' and their gay host Ellen Degeneres (even though he caught a lot of flack for equating the two), but Buddhist Sharon Stone did say that the Sichuan earthquake was caused by bad karma from the Chinese government's mistreatment of Tibetans.

After Robertson supposedly said something that he did not in fact say, many people made remarks along the lines of "Robertson does more for Atheisim than he does for Christianity." I wonder if people will now similarly malign Buddhism and Sharon Stone. Somehow I doubt it.

My law school alma mater, Chapman University School of Law, has amassed a stable of highly touted legal professors (FIVE former SCOTUS law clerks and counting plus a Nobel Laureate) and has just announced the latest addition: Professor Ronald Rotunda. Professor Rotunda is a highly regarded expert on legal ethics and Constitutional Law. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, clerked for Judge Walter R. Mansfield of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, served as assistant majority counsel for the Watergate Committee and previously taught at the University of Illinois and George Mason University. Professor Rotunda is also the co-author of the most widely used course book on legal ethics, "Problems and Materials on Professional Responsibility," and is the author of a leading course book on constitutional law, "Modern Constitutional Law."

The Orange County Register: Legal scholars are Chapman’s latest raid on Virginia
The Blog of The Legal Times (BLT): Ronald Rotunda Leaves George Mason for Chapman University
Brian Leiter: Rotunda from George Mason to Chapman

UPDATE: The ABA Journal has also taken note: Two More High Profile Profs Lured From George Mason to Chapman.

As someone who has "been there, done that" at Chapman, I can honestly say that the professors I had were top notch. They weren't just top scholars in their respective fields, they were (and still are) excellent teachers who were genuinely interested in mentoring future attorneys.

/bragging

7.62 mm Justice is all over this one, head on over for the details.

Hadeel Alhodaif, a leading Saudi female blogger died last Friday after slipping into a coma a few weeks ago. Alhodaif was one of the few bloggers in the Arab world blogging under her own name. She used her blog to demand greater liberties for those living in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East at large.

It is difficult to imagine the death of a blogger in the West making national news. But leading Arab and Iranian web diarists enjoy an almost cult status. Their closest cultural counterpart in the West would perhaps be a graffiti artist, such as Banksy, or even a campaigning pop star, such as Bono.

Liberals admired Ms Alhodaif because she was a gifted, published literary writer who also promoted freedom of expression in her blog, Heaven's Steps. For them, there was a tragic sense of loss: a writer had been cut off in her early prime before she had the opportunity to produce her best work.

[Hat Tip: Blog Herald]

John McCain was on SNL tonight poking fun of his age, among other things:

"I ask you, what should we be looking for in our next president?" McCain said. "Certainly, someone who is very, very, very old."
...
Later, during the program's "Weekend Update" segment, McCain urged Democrats not to rush to choose between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

I thought the segments were funny, and a savvy move for McCain. He got a free opportunity to take the edge off of the age issue. And I'm sure this gained him points in the "candidate you'd want to have a beer with" category. Although considering his competition, he probably has that one locked up.

Boots & Sabers liked it. But Rachel Skylar @ HuffPo is miffed that the SNL skits will get more coverage than news items she feels are more important. What did you all think?

The California Supreme Court struck down a statute (passed through a voter initiative) defining marriage as "between a man and a woman." You can read the opinion here: In Re Marriage Cases [pdf].

[I'm only half way through reading the 100+ page opinion, but this is what I have surmised thus far. If there is additional relevant info, I will update this post later.]

The Court defined the issue before it as, "whether our state Constitution prohibits the state from establishing a statutory scheme in which both opposite-sex and same-sex couples are granted the right to enter into an officially recognized family relationship that affords all of the significant legal rights and obligations traditionally associated under state law with the institution of marriage, but under which the union of an opposite-sex couple is officially designated a 'marriage' whereas the union of a same-sex couple is officially designated a 'domestic partnership.'" Essentially, as I read it, this is a really long-winded way of saying, "Can the state grant the same rights and responsibilities to both gay and straight couples but call their respective legal relationships by two different names.

In deciding the case, the court first established that the "right to marry" is a fundamental right protected by the California Constitution and "encompass[es] the core set of basic substantive legal rights and attributes traditionally associated with marriage that ... may not be eliminated or abrogated by the Legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process." The court went on to note that this fundamental right includes "the opportunity of an individual to establish — with the person with whom the individual has chosen to share his or her life — an officially recognized and protected family possessing mutual rights and responsibilities and entitled to the same respect and dignity accorded a union traditionally designated as marriage." The Court felt that making different designations for same-sex couples did not accord them the same dignity and respect the law accorded opposite-sex couples. The Court also noted that same-sex couple's rights under the CA domestic partnership law were not identical to the rights of married couples.

The Court then went on to analyze the case under the Equal Protection Clause and applied strict scrutiny (The state must have a compelling interest and its chosen method must be necessary to serve that interest). The Court felt that the exclusion of same-sex couples from "marriage" was not necessary to protect the rights and interests of opposite-sex married couples. They also argued that prohibiting same-sex couples from using the designation of marriage to describe their relationship would cast doubt on the sincerity of their commitment. Third, the court said that excluding gay couples from marriage would likely be viewed as official state disdain for gays and/or gay couples. Related to their third point, the Court said that the distinction would likely be viewed as making gay couples "second class citizens."

This matter is not going away just because the CA Supreme Court has rulled. A group called Protect Marriage has already submitted the necessary paperwork [pdf] to the CA Secretary of State to get a voter initiative on the next ballot that would define marriage as between one man and one woman in the California Constitution (essentially the only way to overturn the CA Supreme Court ruling).

[Hat Tip to The Moderate Voice]

Move over Chicago, CA is making a run for the corrupt politics crown. Sacramento lawyer and Democratic Party superdelegate Steven Ybarra says that he will sell his vote to whichever Democrat candidate pays him $20 million.

Today is Israel's 60th birthday. In Hebrew, the holiday is called Yom Ha'atzmaut (Yohm Hah-ohts-mah-oot). Israelis celebrate (at least according to Wikipedia) by barbecuing, and in the evening, people usually go to the streets to sing and dance. Children and teenagers spray bystanders with silly string and fireworks are also set off.

Many Israeli bloggers have interesting posts up today, so I thought I'd share some link love...

Lazer Beams asks Are We Really Independent?
I'll Call Baila has a list of 60 Things She Loves About Israel
Super Raizy is throwing a Birthday Party for Israel
Jameel at the Muqata writes about Israel's Youngest Fallen Soldier
6tonsloth of the Jewlicious blog is covering the Israeli Independence Day celebrations in New York.

Also, be sure to check out 60 Bloggers. It's a massive group blog (60 bloggers) posting about their thoughts on Israel as it turns 60 years old.

Speaking of Africa...

The Moderate Voice linked to a story about Obama taking time out of his campaign schedule to negotiate a cease fire between a Nigerian rebel group named The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) and the Nigerian government. MEND recently claimed responsibility for an attack on a Shell Oil facility and are now claiming that they are considering a ceasefire proposal negotiated by Senator Obama. However, Mathew Yglesias reports that the Obama people don't think the Senator was involved in negotiating any ceasefire deal.

From the look of it, Obama is very popular in Nigeria. Maybe MEND channeled what they thought Obama would want them to do?

We here at Stubborn Facts often like to make ample use of statistics and factual findings to support our arguments, so I don't know why none of us thought of this first. A company called StatAttak is producing a series of shirts that graphically represent the stats of various African issues. A percentage of the sale of each shirt will be used to help fund an orphanage in Mozambique.

Check it out: StatAttak shirts.

Here's some news Simon will love. London has just elected its first conservative mayor in 30 years. His name is Boris Johnson and he was born in New York. Interestingly enough, as a child he dreamed of becoming President of the United States.

As a youngster, he once confided to a friend that he would like to be President of the United States. (His birth in New York made this possible, albeit ludicrous).

I haven't researched the subject of Presidential eligibility as extensively as Pat (see, On McCain's Birth) and Simon (see, McCain's Eligibility), so maybe they can chime in, but I thought birth in the U.S. wasn't enough. You have to be a citizen from birth, and from what I can tell, Johnson was never a U.S. citizen.

Glenn Smith at MyDD has a really good post up about the WVWV controversy. While I agree with him that the tone of the criticism of WVWV's actions has gotten a little shrill, I wonder if he would be as charitable if the voter group involved was conservative.

It's the tone of the criticism that concerns me, the rush to condemn and convict. It smells like the Ocoee fire to me.

I don't know what the facts are. I am a committed supporter of Barack Obama's. I have long sense abandoned any idealism that every Democratic candidate is above immoral and unconscionable acts, so I imagine there are supporters of his opponent who would try to suppress his vote. WVWV made mistakes, mistakes that appear to have caused confusion and dread among the voters of North Carolina. The group also mishandled the press and the blogosphere in its reaction to the accusations.

But I still find it hard to believe that a group that has registered hundreds of thousands of voters and conducted similar campaigns in post-election settings that couldn't possibly suppress votes because the voting had already happened would engage in an overt voter suppression effort. If they have, it's the most sophisticated and intricate suppression plan I've ever heard of, complete with alibis and cover of an extraordinary kind.

If you need a backgrounder on the WVWV controversy, Political State Report and Wired both have pretty good overviews. PSR has links to PDFs from the North Carolina AG's office.