Wednesday, July 08, 2009

Talking about marriage in the church

We sent this [9:58] to all the people who have votes at the Episcopal Church's General Convention. For more on Ubuntu, see the previous post.



"It's not the gender of the couple, it's the quality of the relationship." Yes.
***

Until July 18, I'll be working my butt off at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, trying to move us closer to full inclusion of all baptized people, including LGBT people, in all the life of the Church. This time is what we political junkies call "campaign mode" -- the crazy, exhausting 18 hour days of frenetic activity that sometimes win changes we seek and sometimes lead only to deep disappointment. I'm hopeful about how this project will work out. If you are curious about how we're doing, you can follow all the General Convention news at the LGBT advocacy group Integrity's GC portal. I don't expect to blog during this time except perhaps a few photos, but I've got at least a rudimentary post set up for every day, many of them more reflective than the time-sensitive political commentary I often write here. Enjoy.

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Ubuntu: interdependence and cultural appropriation


The theme of this event I'm attending is Ubuntu. The Episcopal Church website explains:

The Trinitarian design depicts God the Creator in the bright center, God the Son in the cross formed by the longitude and latitude lines and God the Holy Spirit, swirling around the Father and the Son. The swirl is comprised of dancing figures, male and female, with faces of many colors, who symbolize the interconnectedness of humanity.

It's graceful, but I need more explication.

Fortunately, retired Archbishop of Cape Town Desmond Tutu has explained in his wonderful little book God Has a Dream.

The first law of our being is that we are in a delicate network of interdependence with our fellow human beings and with the rest of God's creation. In Africa recognition of our interdependence is called ubuntu in Nguni languages, or botho in Sotho, which is difficult to translate into English. It is the essence of being human. It speaks of the fact that my humanity is caught up and inextricably bound up in yours. I am human because I belong. It speaks about wholeness: it speaks about compassion. A person with ubuntu is welcoming, hospitable, warm and generous, willing to share. Such people are open and available to others, willing to be vulnerable, affirming of others, do not feel threatened that others are able and good, for they have a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that they belong in a greater whole. They know that they are diminished when others are humiliated, diminished when others are oppressed, diminished when others are treated as if they were less than who they are. The quality of ubuntu gives people resilience, enabling them to survive and emerge still human despite all efforts to dehumanize them.

You know when ubuntu is there, and it is obvious when it is absent. It has to do with what it means to be truly human, to know that you are bound up with others in the bundle of life. And so we must search for this ultimate attribute and reject ethnicity and other such qualities as irrelevancies. When we Africans want to give high praise to someone, we say "Yo u nobuntu"; "Hey, so and so has ubuntu." A person is a person because he recognizes others as persons. ...

The truth is, we need each other. ... In our world we can survive only together. We can be truly free, ultimately, only together. We can be human only together...

According to ubuntu, it is not a great good to be successful through being aggressively competitive and succeeding at the expense of others. In the end, our purpose is social and communal harmony and well-being. Ubuntu does not say, "I think, therefore I am." It says rather: "I am human because I belong. I participate. I share." Harmony, friendliness, community are great goods. Social harmony is for us the summum bonum -- the greatest good. Anything that subverts, that undermines this sought-after good is to be avoided like the plague. Anger, resentment, lust for revenge, even success through aggressive competitiveness, are corrosive of the good.

Africa has a gift to give the world that the world needs desperately, this reminder that we are more than the sum of our parts: the reminder that strict individualism is debilitating. The world is going to have to learn the fundamental lesson that we are made for harmony, for interdependence. If we are ever truly to prosper, it will be together.

That's not an easy teaching for self-regarding, anxious North Americans.

When I heard of the Convention theme, I was reflexively a little anxious about our adoption of it. The Episcopal Church is not an institution which, by and large, understands that mostly white, mostly privileged people ought to consider carefully before they wax enthusiastic about concepts and activities derived from other peoples' cultures.

There's a reason that most of the world thinks Americans are grabby and arrogant. We see something attractive, we think we can have it. Why shouldn't we get a piece, or even take over, what is so obviously a good thing?

Well -- because it is someone else's culture. Theirs not ours. If we blithely assume we can just take up somebody else's concepts, we're not only being happily imperialistic, we're also being shallow and foolish. Cultural mores are the habits of a life time, lived into, not easily put on like a pretty new shirt.

And yet, and yet -- our human species is interdependent. We do live more and more in a global culture. Part of what that gives us is a chance to understand that other people do know things our culture misses. Not all goodness is Made in America. And people like Bishop Tutu do generously (and prudentially) want to share what they know of how people can live in harmony. Learning from each other, with each other, has always been part of how cultures change and grow. So there we are, back to Ubuntu.
***

Until July 18, I'll be working my butt off at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, trying to move us closer to full inclusion of all baptized people, including LGBT people, in all the life of the Church. This time is what we political junkies call "campaign mode" -- the crazy, exhausting 18 hour days of frenetic activity that sometimes win changes we seek and sometimes lead only to deep disappointment. I'm hopeful about how this project will work out. If you are curious about how we're doing, you can follow all the General Convention news at the LGBT advocacy group Integrity's GC portal. I don't expect to blog during this time except perhaps a few photos, but I've got at least a rudimentary post set up for every day, many of them more reflective than the time-sensitive political commentary I often write here. Enjoy.

Monday, July 06, 2009

Robert McNamara's lessons

I've had the movie "The Fog of War" sitting around for a month without having found time to view it. I now wish I had done so before the news of the death of former Secretary of Defense [War] Robert McNamara.

I'm old enough to remember McNamara as the "corporate genius" who was going to streamline the Pentagon in the early 1960s. Under Donald Rumsfeld's tenure, I sometimes thought I was hearing echos of that long-ago hubris so brutally derailed in South East Asia. No management expertise can make war predictable and clean -- especially if the political calculations that lead to the war are not brutally honest.

Over at Hullabaloo, dday -- who has seen the movie -- lists the lessons that McNamara took from Vietnam. They are overwhelmingly worth reading. Here's just one:

We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people’s or country’s best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.

President Obama, listen up. You and your smart operatives are following former Secretary McNamara's prescriptions for failure in Afghanistan. Stay on that course and you'll certainly derail the train of hope that got you elected.

Birthday thoughts

Bringing home baby-web size.jpg

Sixty two years ago, a couple -- not so young -- brought home a baby. They look a little bemused by what they had wrought -- at least my father does. Mother's delight was less ambiguous.

They remained bemused for the rest of their lives, but never doubted I was a good, even wonderful, addition to the world. Naturally, I came to believe that the world itself is good and wonderful. Love makes a feedback loop.

Sunday, July 05, 2009

What's this General Convention?

Until July 18, I'll be working my butt off at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, trying to move us closer to full inclusion of all baptized people, including LGBT people, in all the life of the Church. This time is what we political junkies call "campaign mode" -- the crazy, exhausting 18 hour days of frenetic activity that sometimes win changes we seek and sometimes lead only to deep disappointment.

I'm hopeful about how this project will work out. If you are curious about how we're doing, you can follow all the General Convention news at the LGBT advocacy group Integrity's GC portal.

I don't expect to blog during this time except perhaps a few photos, but I've got at least a rudimentary post set up for everyday, many of them more reflective than the time-sensitive political commentary I often write here. Enjoy.


To get this time started, here's a video [3:11] about the General Convention. H/t to Jim Dela, President of Episcopal Communicators by way of The Lead.



This thing is big -- Episcopal News Service has used this boilerplate to describe it:

The Episcopal Church’s General Convention, held every three years, is the bicameral governing body of the church. General Convention, the second largest legislative body in the world, is comprised of the House of Bishops, with more than 200 members, and the House of Deputies, with clergy and lay representatives from 110 dioceses in 15 nations, at over 700 members.

Wish us luck.

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Irony is dead

This day of celebration of historic U.S. freedoms, the New York Time email news summary includes this item:

Top Reformers Admitted Plot, Iran Declares
By MICHAEL SLACKMAN
The Iranian government has made it a practice to publicize confessions from political prisoners, often subject to sleep deprivation, solitary confinement and torture, rights groups say.

My emphasis, obviously. Do these people read their own newspaper? Or perhaps they have consumed too much of that euphemistic pablum that passes for reporting in their own pages -- have a little harsh interrogation, anyone?

Pismo Beach patriotism

july-4-angel--.jpg

The patriotic angel in the previous post seemed to me "camp," a tongue in cheek display. This one spotted yesterday seemed more serious.

Can anyone enlighten me about this (unfamiliar to me) cultural iconography?

Our national day

july-4-display.jpg
It's just not fair to say we don't celebrate patriotism in San Francisco. Check out this display!
***


San Francisco writer Tamim Ansary explains what it means to him to be an American in West of Kabul, East of New York.

Growing up bicultural is like straddling a crack in the earth. If the cultures are far apart -- like those of Afghanistan and America -- one feels an urge to get entirely over to one side or the other. ... I ... tried to straddle the fault line, although, to be sure, I shifted my weight quite definitively over to my American foot. ...And I wonder why.

... being an Afghan among Americans made me no less American. After all, most Americans are something else, as well. America's characteristic flavor is made of the otherness we all bring to this stew.

Can we remember our otherness as well as our common culture?
***

Until July 18, I'll be working my butt off at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, trying to move us closer to full inclusion of all baptized people, including LGBT people, in all the life of the Church. This time is what we political junkies call "campaign mode" -- the crazy, exhausting 18 hour days of frenetic activity that sometimes win changes we seek and sometimes lead only to deep disappointment. I'm hopeful about how this project will work out. If you are curious about how we're doing, you can follow all the General Convention news at the LGBT advocacy group Integrity's GC portal. I don't expect to blog during this time except perhaps a few photos, but I've got at least a rudimentary post set up for every day, many of them more reflective than the time-sensitive political commentary I often write here. Enjoy.

Friday, July 03, 2009

President Obama: Betrayal or Failure?
Part Two


Part one is here.

As I said in my last post, it matters whether the occasions on which Obama is disappointing many of his supporters are happening because we are being betrayed (he was fooling us for electoral purposes) or he is failing to be able to do what he would prefer (delivering what we want is not within the power of the President). Betrayal actually is the easier lapse to remedy: political pressure can bring around an opportunistic politician. But if we are seeing failure, if our elected leader cannot get the system to do what he actually would prefer to do, citizen engagement requires deeper and more complex pressure on whatever parts of the system stand in his way.

In my previous post I mused about the parts of the President's program in which he is acting as if Congress were a co-equal, competent branch of government. Just saying that points out how novel an approach this is -- and raises up the realization that he, and we, are hobbled by this course. Still, it is Constitutional behavior.

When it comes to wielding executive power, President Obama doesn't seem to be so cautious in his adherence to legal norms. People who read this blog know the list: since taking office, Obama's administration has sought to use legal privilege to conceal pictures and reports that would prove torture and abuse of prisoners, made legal filings to shut down discovery of past abuses, and flat out refused to share information about how the executive branch works. He's not only covering up for Dick Cheney for goodness sakes -- despite some pretty words, he plans on continuing indefinite detention of prisoners who have not been tried by any plausible court, will still make renditions of people to third countries where torture is practiced, and plans to hold captives in Afghanistan without judicial process.

I think it is fair to believe that that Candidate Obama promised a regime more respectful of law, due process and human rights than he has so far given us, so there's a huge element of betrayal as we look again at an executive acting not very differently from George W.

But there's a lot of failure in this as well; it is reasonable to assume that Obama is getting strong and effective push back from the spooks and the military who were tasked to do the dirty work and don't want it uncovered or repudiated. And they have the power to get a lot of what they want, regardless of the latest President.

But it is also clear that the people of the United States remain terrorized, willing to piss in their pants at the thought that some confused Yemeni accused of something might be locked up in a near-by prison. The majority of our fellow citizens are quite simply mad with irrational fear -- we can't expect to get decent behavior from politicians while there's a majority that actively wants to throw away human rights concepts rather than take any risk. They believe torture -- or at least being "tough" -- protects them. They easily dehumanize foreigners, especially dark ones and Muslim ones.

Those of us who want to end the U.S. torture regime -- not to speak of our warrior empire -- have a job to do that involves winning over our fellow citizens. We are not going to get an executive that resists the multiple pressures from all sides to use imperial power lawlessly until a very strong citizen constituency demands this. This can be won. French citizens in the 1960s finally came to understand that the colonial torture and murder regime in Algeria was destroying France itself. We need to work, patiently but hopefully, to make available the same lesson to our people. Then we might be able to get a President who can make change we believe in.

Oddly, at the same time we justly complain of betrayal, we have to work to create the conditions in which the better aspects of Obama's promise can succeed.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

President Obama: Betrayal or Failure?



A lot of us are not sure what we think of President Obama's leadership, six months into his Presidency. I didn't leap into the 100 days assessment fray -- the evaluating of the new administration on very little evidence back in April -- because I wasn't sure what I thought. On many important issues, the Obama administration was not doing all I hoped for. But why the repeated shortfalls?

The answer to the "why" matters. I don't think about politics for intellectual stimulation -- I believe enough in our democracy that I figure I have to participate in citizenship. When the government is, in my opinion, acting wrongly or not doing its job, I agitate. In order to agitate, I have to assess where the obstacles lie.

Since we had a candidate who promised "change," we've got a right to ask of Obama, over and over, "where's the change?" And if we don't see change, we need to consider, why? I find two categories useful in thinking about this:
  • Betrayal: the officeholder was just spinning gossamer moonbeams in order to get elected and has no intention of delivering;
and
  • Failure: despite good intentions, the politician discovers systemic obstacles to delivering on promises.
Obviously in real life the categories can blur -- but the distinction matters because the two categories suggest different political responses from engaged citizens. As a general rule, if the politician was just BSing a constituency in order to get elected, straight-up outraged pressure might work to turn him (her) around. Failure is more of a problem; useful political pressure may need to be directed at other systemic features besides the visible political leader in order to create circumstances that will enable the leader to come closer to fulfilling a promise.

In the light of this framework, here's a once over lightly on some of the ways the Obama administration is not delivering (or not yet delivering) the change we hoped for:
  • Economy: The big banks and Wall Street are pretty happy campers; it's hard to see why the rest of us should be. We've shoveled taxpaper money at them; Goldman Sachs in on track to have its best year ever; gazillionare CEOs waltz onward. Proposed regulations to prevent more of the same are weak and Wall Street is confidently shelling out our money to lobbyists to weaken them further.

    Meanwhile, Main Street is still screwed -- and not necessarily looking at turning a corner. Today it's announced that unemployment averages 9.5 percent: we know that means for Latinos it is probably 15 percent and African Americans it's close to 20 percent. That's change to riot over, or could be if it persists as long as looks likely.

    Obama got a stimulus bill passed; most economists think it is too small. And for practical purposes, that cash is just beginning to hit the streets (I did see a teenage trail maintenance crew out yesterday ...yeah!) On the economy, I give Obama a "good try" leaning toward Failure. He was never going to be a radical, but apparently he couldn't risk taking on the barons of finance, so he has bought them off with our money. What happens next time they get in over their heads? There is nothing to stop them.

    This kind of failure can only be corrected by an engaged popular movement advocating for numerous economic changes that tip the playing field back to the less than affluent majority. Looking for ideas? Try Dean Baker's The Conservative Nanny State.
  • Health care: a reckoning is still out. Congress is mucking about with various ideas, none of them really universal or equitable. All the people in power decided that the really sensible option -- tax-financed health care for all like Medicare -- couldn't be brought up because it would kill the insurance racket.

    They'll probably pass something. Whether it will cut costs or help sick people is still up for grabs, though it is not looking good. No grade yet, but lots of danger of Failure.

    Again, and the President has said as much, only organized people can turn this one around. I'm grateful to the folks from Code Pink and the Nurses Association who took the message to our smug Senators. Obama would probably prefer some other kind of citizen activity, but he'll get what he gets.
  • Energy/Climate Change: When action to prevent the planet from frying has to be billed as about "clean energy and security" in the bill title, you know you are already on the way to Failure. Nothing should be so important as trying to ensure that this generation's children get to live in a reasonably hospitable environment. But nothing can get through Congress that doesn't falsely promise we can painlessly use any resource we can pump, mine or steal to live as profligately we always have.

    The organized constituency demanding we change our economy and lifestyle entitlements to preserve the planet isn't there. Obama can't get out too far ahead of us, even if he wanted to (it's not clear he'd want to be out ahead, though he's smart enough to see necessity and he has kids.)
What is ever so noticeable about these three areas where we see Obama failing is that they involve an attempt at cooperation with Congress. This goes well beyond the guy's vaunted enthusiasm for "bi-partisanship" -- currently a chimera. What's really remarkable here is the lengths to which we're seeing Obama go to treat Congress as if it were a functional deliberative body that has a partnership role in democratic policy making. Have we seen a President take this attitude to Congress since perhaps Ford or Carter? I don't think so.

Even as we scream about Obama failing and try to create pressures that help get what we want from his administration, we need to recognize that we have a President who, to this point, has tried harder to make the ostensible Constitutional system work as far as legislation goes than any we've seen in a long time. This looks deliberate. It also looks like a recipe for failures the country can't afford.

Will Obama keep trying to make something of Congress? -- and apparently be limited to policy half-measures that don't do what he seems to know needs to be done? Or will he act like most of the imperial Presidents since FDR and try to run over Congress for his conception of the good? Would those of us looking at Obama's failures like that better? Time will tell.

This is part one of two posts on this question. I'll take up Obama's actions that are more clearly executive branch actions in part two.

A little civilization breaks in


Photo by Steve Rhodes.

California may be going broke -- and a lot of good people are fighting to save the valuable functions of government from Republicans who refuse to tax themselves, ever, for anything but prisons.

But amidst it all, several friends of mine were part of overwhelming a committee the other day on another important topic: the death penalty. The LA Times captures the mild amazement that greeted this citizen outcry.

Reporting from Sacramento -- Corrections officials heard overwhelming condemnation of proposed new lethal injection procedures Tuesday at the first-ever public hearing on execution methods in the state.

Contrary to the solid majority of Californians who in opinion polls expressed support for the death penalty, only two out of more than 100 speakers supported a resumption of death sentences once legal hurdles are cleared. ...

Despite what was supposed to be a narrow discussion, religious leaders, doctors, lawyers, teachers and family members of murderers and their victims seized the opportunity to rail against "state-sponsored killing" and the $125 million a year spent to maintain a dysfunctional death row.

Opponents rallied by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California capped the eight-hour marathon of three-minute speeches by delivering a symbolic, oversized check for $1 billion to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office -- the amount needed over the next five years to bring executions up to constitutional standards. ...

Johanna Westerson, a Swedish human rights lawyer living in San Francisco, urged state officials to "join the civilized nations of the world in abandoning this barbaric practice" and part company with the likes of China, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Nice work. Kudos to the organizers.

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Health care reform



Succinctly ...

The free market for health care is one in which sick people die ...

James Kwak
The Baseline Scenario

The debate in Washington is about how many of their fellow citizens have to die because our Congresscritters are bought and paid for by the "free market."
***

While playing this YouTube, you may see an ad at the bottom of the frame. That ad may even be selling you opposition to publicly available health care. It is brought to you courtesy of Google, which owns YouTube; that is they sold your eyeballs.

You can make the ad go away by clicking in the little "x" at the right of the ad box. And you can remember that friendly Google -- also -- is an evil creature of the "free market."

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

U.S. troops depart Iraqi cities (mostly)


On a day when some Iraqis are celebrating "National Sovereignty," the least antiwar folks in this country can do is wish them well -- and remain vigilant in combatting our empire builders' intent to hang on in that unfortunate country. I'm of the hopeful sort who thinks that U.S. exhaustion and over-extension promise that Iraqis can slough us off if they choose. But despite today's festivities, it's not going to be a simple road forward.

News from the no fly list front


The smiling gentleman pictured above is Abousfian Abdelrazik, a naturalized Canadian who has been stranded in his native Sudan since 2003. On a visit to his sick mother, the Montreal resident was twice imprisoned and tortured by the local government, according to him at the instance of Canadian and U.S. authorities who suspected him of ties to terrorism. The Canadians and Sudanese eventually cleared him, but then he found himself with an expired passport and placed on a United Nations no fly list. For the last 14 months, he slept on the floor of the Canadian embassy in Khartoum. Canadian activists helped him go to court to get their government to fly him home. Under court order, they finally did this last Saturday. No wonder he looks happy,

Despite being cleared by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (that's like being cleared by the FBI), Abdelrazik may not be done with his troubles.

Paul Champ, one of Abdelrazik's lawyers, said being on the UN no-fly list means more than travel restrictions.

"It's not simply a no-fly list. I guess you can call it a UN black list. That means an asset freeze," Champ told CBC News. "When he gets back to Canada, he's going to be subject to all kinds of conditions.

"He's unlikely to be able to open a bank account. He likely will not be able to have a job, because anyone paying him or giving him money in any way could be regarded as a crime. So he's going to be living with some severe restraints that we're going to be working very hard to lift by whatever means possible," he said.

This case isn't going away for Canadian civil libertarians.
***

Critics of U.S. government no fly lists and watch lists are on the way to picking up some not entirely comfortable bedfellows these days.

It seems that the gun lobby has succeeded in so restricting federal oversight of gun purchases, that individuals on the various government lists can't be impeded from buying weapons. According to the June 20 New York Times:

WASHINGTON — People on the government’s terrorist watch list tried to buy guns nearly 1,000 times in the last five years, and federal authorities cleared the purchases 9 times out of 10 because they had no legal way to stop them, according to a new government report.

In one case, a person on the list was able to buy more than 50 pounds of explosives.

Thanks to the efforts of the National Rifle Association, it's nearly impossible for the government to regulate guns, though they can ban your shampoo and toothpaste when you travel ... I don't quite get it.

Anyway, recognition of this odd legal anomaly has led some Congresscritters to try to deny guns to people on the watch lists. New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy and Congressman Steve Israel led off the push for a new law in May. After the report cited above came out, New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg jumped into the project.

The NRA isn't about to let their pro-gun legal regime get infringed on by a little wimpy fear of purchases by bad guys. They are up in arms about the (well-documented) deficiencies of the lists.

However, the National Rifle Association said the terrorist watch list was too poorly maintained to justify preventing gun sales to people on it.

"The integrity of the terror watch list is poor," said Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist. "To deny law-abiding people due process and their Second Amendment rights based on a secret list is not how we do things in America."

Hmm ... wonder if Mr. Cox applies that standard Muslim-Americans?

I'd bet on the gun nuts in this one -- politicians are probably more scared of Mr. Cox than they are that a terrorist incident will happen "on their watch." It's all one more demonstration that this stuff is theater, not security.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Some were working

Yesterday was the San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade and festival. The weather was unusually friendly: sunny but not sweltering. We often get fog and cold drizzle that astonishes tourists.

The crowd was huge and good natured. Most everyone seemed to be having a good time.

But not everyone was reveling. Some people were working. Two images from a set of photos I was capturing for another project:

1recycler.jpg
This gentleman was collecting our recycling doggedly.

2working-at-family-thai-foo.jpg
And this woman was toiling alongside younger family members at a Thai barbecue stand.

Let's hope their efforts were worthwhile for them in the midst of our play.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

What we're seeing on TV isn't real?



Lee Stranahan made this and several more. His blog is here. He's "an uninsured father taking on the insurance industry."



This health reform stuff isn't really all that complicated, is it?

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Religious campaign against torture


Activism against U.S. torture policies over the last few days didn't end with the demonstrators at the Ninth Circuit Court. The local members of National Religious Campaign Against Torture held a conference Friday evening and all day Saturday in Palo Alto.

The panelists on Friday evening, shown above included, from left to right: David DeCosse, a Santa Clara University ethicist; Dr. Jean Marie Arrigo, a social psychologist who is active in trying to turn the American Psychological Society against torture and whose research involves collecting the stories of U.S. personnel touched by U.S. torture policies; Terrence Karney, a former Army interrogator and instructor who served in the Sunni Triangle in Iraq and who repudiates torture as a tool of his trade; Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst, now working with Tell the Word, a project of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in DC; and Ben Daniel, a Presbyterian pastor in San Jose.

I can't say I learned huge amounts from this event -- except what activists always need to remember: it takes painstaking, ongoing, patient organizing to mobilize public opinion against injustice.
***

While we're on the torture campaigns, take a click over to SFMike's place -- he covered the same Bybee demonstraton I dropped in on.

Good cheer for a gay pride weekend



You couldn't show this on U.S. TV, but evidently it sells in France.

Shamelessly lifted from Time Goes By.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Torture Accountability in San Francisco

Yesterday, June 25, was Torture Accountability Day. President Obama may wish to look forward instead of back. But there are activists who don't believe vicious government sanctioned abuse of prisoners will be rooted out unless some of the authorities authorizing this illegal conduct suffer some consequences.

1Federal-district-court-9th.jpg
The home of the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is an imposing building, isn't it?

2impeach-judge-bybee!.jpg
One of its judges is Jay Bybee, author of one of the nasty bureaucratic justifications of torture churned out by the Bush Department of Justice. Why is this guy still a federal judge?

Activists delivered petitions calling for Bybee to be disbarred for professional misconduct -- for making up excuses for patently illegal conduct.

3we-are-all-responsible.jpg

5Shame-on-Yoo.jpg
We were also reminded of our other local torture enabler, Professor John Yoo. Why is that man still teaching at the University of California Law School at Boalt Hall?

6stuff-of-activism.jpg
Folks in attendance laid out some of the tools of activism: buttons to continually remind and raise the question; pens to pass the word along. Building a moral and political consensus that repudiates torture is not the work of a moment. It will take time and angst and devotion. Other societies have done this work; we can too, but it won't be easy.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

While the planet burns ...


On Friday, the Congress will vote on an "energy" bill, known usually by the names of its writers and House legislative managers, Waxman-Markey. It aims to reduce or at least cap carbon emissions, the driver of global warming. It's been negotiated near to death and many believe it's become close to useless, except symbolically. Here's a smorgasbord of opinions.

As with health care reform, I don't claim to understand all the policy minutiae embedded in these matters, but I am interested in the politics. Here's Matt Yglesias on why our Congresscritters can't see their way to even reduce climate change, much less combat it.

...there's really no getting around the fact that the best feasible legislative outcome isn't good enough according to the climate science. What we're left with is essentially the hope for an iterative process -- a flawed bill that makes progress helps spur a productive meeting in Copenhagen helps spur some kind of bilateral deal with China which helps create the conditions for further domestic legislation. I think this is the best idea anyone has, but it's a pretty dicey proposition. Bottom line is that to get a better bill you need a situation wherein a non-trivial number of Republicans are willing to contemplate emissions reductions. Faced with uniform Republican support for untrammeled pollution, the only viable legislative path involves buying off every Democrat.

In theory, we're this big-brained animal that has survived and thrived because it outwitted its potential competitors for the role of dominant species on the planet.

How come we're so dumb?
***
Via Andrew Leonard, I hear that Berkeley has ended its program to use biofuels in city vehicles as an anti-carbon pollution measure because growing all that corn makes for more CO2 releases than using everyday gas.

Not so dumb.
***
Via the Washington Post, I see that most of us think the government should step up to the task of controlling climate damage.

Three-quarters of Americans think the federal government should regulate the release into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases from power plants, cars and factories to reduce global warming, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, with substantial majority support from Democrats, Republicans and independents.

This is beginning to look like the healthcare reform debate: three quarters of us want the government to do its job -- a few law makers just want to keep their contributions from the bad guys and perhaps serve their local interests at the expense of most people.

Meanwhile, where's Obama on all this? His people understand the science, even if Congress doesn't/won't.