A Few Fine Links

flickr: Library of Congress photostream
The WaPo says they were just kidding about that whole dumb women thing. So, they think it's OK to joke about sexist stereotypes, and they really think we are dumb enough to accept that lame excuse. Laura Rosen has excellent coverage of the issue at War and Piece.

Vanity Fair reports that George Bush, Master of Disaster, royally fucked up the Gaza/Hamas/Fatah/Israel relationship (which was bad enough to begin with) with a disastrous intervention into Palestinian politics. If you don't have time to read the whole article, here's a summary by Ron Beasley of Middle Earth Journal:

* The administration demanded that elections be held in Palestine, the Democracy thing you know.
* Hamas won 56 percent of the seats in the Legislative Council which took everyone in the administration by surprise. They must not have been listening to Rumsfeld when he said Democracy is messy.
* The Bush administration told the Abbas to disolve the recently elected government and declare Marshall law.
* They then armed his party, Fatah.
* When word of this leaked out the result was a civil war which Hamas won.
* Hamas confiscated most of the US supplied weapons are are now using them to shoot at Israelis.

Troutnut at dailykos catches Hillary Clinton's campaign darkening Obama's skintone in her ads. Shades of the Time magazine OJ Simpson cover.

Did you ever buy that Airborne stuff that is supposed to keep you from getting sick on planes? Turns out they made up the supposed scientific research they cited. There's a $23 million settlement in a class-action lawsuit (they must have sold a LOT of those pills, no?) and The Consumerist has the links where you can file for your refund. This is the kind of case tort reformers want to eliminate.

A little parody site: John McCain Is Our Jalopy. Just keep hitting refresh to see the messages change.

Climate Progress points out the "brutal drought" in Australia and predicts that this is what the American Southwest will be like in 2050.

Borked

NYTimes editorial Borks Bork: Bork v. Bork

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Blogtopia* RoundUp, Thursday, June 14, 2007

Happy Flag Day!

The Solicitor General will not fight for defrauded investors -- even though dozens of state attorneys general have -- on direct order from Herr Bush. There go defrauded investors rights and probably the pensions of the Enron workers. Robert Borosage, commonsense.com: Bank Shot: Bush Shafts Enron's Victims, via The Left Coaster

Speaking of lawsuits, (the good) Roger Ailes skewers Robert Bork delightfully.

At HuffPo, comedian Kate Clinton riffs on the gay bomb. You heard that right, the Air Force requested $7.5 million to develop a bomb to turn our enemies gay.

I'm surprised this request for millions for the gay bomb wasn't approved, as the New York Times reports today that the Justice Department has been take over by theocrats enforcing nonexistent religious discrimination. Or, as one clever blogger put it: Crusading Crackpots Taking over the DOJ

Speaking of DOJ, the multiple investigations have gotten into the White House. Former White House Counsel and exclamation point lover Harriet Miers and former White House political director Sara Taylor have both been subpoenaed to appear before Congress. Taylor's US Attorney email messages, and those of her deputy, Scott Jennings, were both sent on their Republican National Committee email accounts. Subpoena duces tecum, anyone?

Hypocrites-R-Us

Blue Mass. Group: Tort Reform Zealot Robert Bork Sues the Yale Club for $1M

We all remember Robert Bork, right? Reagan nominated him to the Supreme Court but we liberals kept him off. (Whoo, liberals, whoo!) Ted Kennedy described Bork and his philosophy in these immortal words (which helped sink his nomination), ""Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government." Bork is also a long-time proponent of tort reform (or as we lawyers call it, tort deform) which would severely curtail access to the courts for individuals.

Mr roll-back-the-clock Borkie wants compensatory and punitive damages because he fell down and got a boo-boo. He was climbing onto a dais and fell off. Apparently he was the only person at the event who couldn't make the step up.

He seeks actual damages which he claims are in excess of $1,000,000, punitive damages, interest, and attorney's fees.

One of his tort reform buddies at the American Enterprise Institute called the suit "embarrassingly silly." I must concur.

Katrina Aftermath, Still a Struggle Against Incompetence and Corruption

Dead bodies are still being recovered in New Orleans, seven months later:

NYTimes: In Attics and Rubble, More Bodies and Questions

The bodies of storm victims are still being discovered in New Orleans — in March alone there were nine, along with one skull. Skeletonized or half-eaten by animals, with leathery, hardened skin or missing limbs, the bodies are lodged in piles of rubble, dangling from rafters or lying face down, arms outstretched on parlor floors. Many of them, like Ms. Blanchard, were overlooked in initial searches.

A landlord in the Lakeview section put a "for sale" sign outside a house, unaware that his tenant's body was in the attic. Two weeks ago, searchers in the Lower Ninth Ward found a girl, believed to be about 6, wearing a blue backpack. Nearby, they found part of a man who the authorities believe might have been trying to save her.

[On Friday, contractors found a body in the attic of a home in the Gentilly neighborhood that had been searched twice before, officials said.]

In the weeks after Hurricane Katrina, there were grotesque images of bodies left in plain sight. Officials in Louisiana recovered more than 1,200 bodies, but the process, hamstrung by money shortages and red tape, never really ended.

In the Lower Ninth Ward, where unstable houses make searching dangerous, a plan to use cadaver dogs alongside demolition crews was delayed by lawsuits and community protests against the bulldozing. In the rest of the city, the absence of neighbors and social networks meant that some residents languished and died unnoticed. Many of the families of the missing were far from home, rendered helpless by distance and preoccupied with their own survival.

[]

In October and November, the special operations team of the New Orleans Fire Department searched the Lower Ninth Ward for remains until they ran out of overtime money.

Half a dozen officials of the Federal Emergency Management Agency rebuffed requests to pay the bill, said Chief Steve Glynn, the team commander. When reporters inquired, FEMA officials said the required paperwork had not been filed.

While FEMA couldn't find the money to find and bury the dead, they made sure to pad the coffers of rich contractors:

Times-Picayune: Senators grill corps, FEMA
Hearing details waste in relief spending

Testimony at a U.S. Senate subcommittee hearing Monday in New Orleans showed that in the matter of the Katrina cleanup, taxpayers got taken to the cleaners.

[]

[T]he hearing also revealed in stark terms how the poor level of federal preparation and response carried more than an economic punch. As the questions from the elected officials gained momentum, it became clear that two themes especially bothered the Louisiana contingent. One was that, for all of the state's storied corruption and the defense its officials had to mount that relief money would not be squandered in Louisiana, the lion's share of waste occurred under the federal watch.

The second theme is that tens of millions of dollars were frittered away in layers of subcontractors. What Washington and the nation need to realize, the Louisiana contingent argued, is the totals bandied about as earmarked for relief are, in fact, grotesquely inflated by misspending.

Insurance companies are also preying on the weak and defenseless. Tort reform advocate Trent Lott is using the tort system he so hates to prove insurance companies are cheating homeowners in the hurricane zone:

AP: Lott Lawyer: State Farm Destroying Papers

Zach Scruggs, one of Lott's attorneys, says his client has a "good faith belief" that several State Farm employees in Biloxi are destroying engineering reports that gave conflicting conclusions about whether wind or water was responsible for storm damage.

Like thousands of Gulf Coast homeowners, Lott's claim was denied because State Farm concluded that Katrina's flood water demolished his beach-front Pascagoula home. State Farm says its policies do not cover damage from rising water, including wind-driven water.

But lawyers for the Mississippi Republican claim Bloomington, Ill.-based State Farm has routinely pressured its engineers to alter "favorable" reports that initially blamed damage on hurricane's wind, which the company's policies cover.

A State Farm spokesman said Monday he couldn't immediately comment on Scruggs' allegations.

Lott's allegations come on the heels of a lawsuit filed by Kiln, Miss., couple who claimed they had obtained copies of conflicting reports prepared by State Farm's engineers on what damaged their home. They said one report traced the destruction to Katrina's winds while a later report said flooding was the culprit.

In response, State Farm spokesman Phil Supple had said the second report was the only one the engineering firm sent to State Farm's claims office.

In an interview Monday, Scruggs said corporate "whistleblowers" who are cooperating with Lott's attorneys have provided evidence that State Farm employees are destroying or moving those "initial favorable" engineering reports.

Sneaking In Tort Deform

It's an old Republican trick. Set minimum standards for safety (as in, this is the least you must do) and then hold that any manufacturer that does the very least is immune from suit, as though they had done all they could do to make consumers safe. The Bush Administration is a breeding ground filled with former industry executives and lobbyists, and they're writing all their favorite anti-consumer proposals into administrative law.

LA Times: Industries Get Quiet Protection From Lawsuits
Federal agencies are using arcane regulations and legal opinions to shield automakers and others from challenges by consumers and states.

[T]hrough arcane regulatory actions and legal opinions, the Bush administration is providing industries with an unprecedented degree of protection at the expense of an individual's right to sue and a state's right to regulate.

In other moves by the administration:

• The highway safety agency, a branch of the Department of Transportation, is backing auto industry efforts to stop California and other states from regulating tailpipe emissions they link to global warming. The agency said last summer that any such rule would be a backdoor attempt by states to encroach on federal authority to set mileage standards, and should be preempted.

• The Justice Department helped industry groups overturn a pollution-control rule in Southern California that would have required cleaner-running buses, garbage trucks and other fleet vehicles.

• The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has repeatedly sided with national banks to fend off enforcement of consumer protection laws passed by California, New York and other states. The agency argued that it had sole authority to regulate national banks, preempting state restrictions.

• The Food and Drug Administration issued a legal opinion last month asserting that FDA-approved labels should give pharmaceutical firms broad immunity from most types of lawsuits. The agency previously had filed briefs seeking dismissal of various cases against drug companies and medical-device manufacturers.

In a letter to President Bush on Thursday, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said, "It appears that there may have been an administration-wide directive for agencies … to limit corporate liability through the rule-making process and without the consent of Congress."

News Round-Up January 31, 2006

Some news you may have missed:

Front paged all over Europe yesterday, the UK issued a report stating "the Greenland ice sheet is likely to melt, leading sea levels to rise by seven metres over 1,000 years." Stark warning over climate change

James Carroll states the obvious in an op-ed in the Boston Globe: You can't have a war when there is no enemy. Is America actually in a state of war?

State of the Union? Catastrophe, pure and simple.

The Top 25 Censored Stories of 2005.

#1 Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government

#2 Media Coverage Fails on Iraq: Fallujah and the Civilian Death

#3 Another Year of Distorted Election Coverage

#4 Surveillance Society Quietly Moves In

#5 U.S. Uses Tsunami to Military Advantage in Southeast Asia

#6 The Real Oil for Food Scam

#7 Journalists Face Unprecedented Dangers to Life and Livelihood

#8 Iraqi Farmers Threatened By Bremer’s Mandates

#9 Iran’s New Oil Trade System Challenges U.S. Currency
#10 Mountaintop Removal Threatens Ecosystem and Economy
#11 Universal Mental Screening Program Usurps Parental Rights

#12 Military in Iraq Contracts Human Rights Violators

#13 Rich Countries Fail to Live up to Global Pledges

#14 Corporations Win Big on Tort Reform, Justice Suffers

#15 Conservative Plan to Override Academic Freedom in the Classroom

#16 U.S. Plans for Hemispheric Integration Include Canada

#17 U.S. Uses South American Military Bases to Expand Control of the Region

#18 Little Known Stock Fraud Could Weaken U.S. Economy

#19 Child Wards of the State Used in AIDS Experiments

#20 American Indians Sue for Resources; Compensation Provided to Others

#21 New Immigration Plan Favors Business Over People

#22 Nanotechnology Offers Exciting Possibilities But Health Effects Need Scrutiny

#23 Plight of Palestinian Child Detainees Highlights Global Problem

#24 Ethiopian Indigenous Victims of Corporate and Government Resource Aspirations

#25 Homeland Security Was Designed to Fail

Terri Schiavo Case

While Corporate Media reports every 15 minutes on "The Fight To Save Terri Schiavo", the phrase with which every story on MSNBCNNCNBCFOXNN is prefaced, here's what is missing from the coverage; from Digby:

By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are also aware that Republicans have voted en masse to pull the plug (no pun intended) on medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country.

Those of us who read liberal blogs also understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo's care thus far.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are aware that the bankruptcy bill will make it even more difficult for families who suffer a catastrophic illness like Terry Schiavo's because they will not be able to declare chapter 7 bankruptcy and get a fresh start when the gargantuan medical bills become overwhelming.

And those of us who read liberal blogs also know that this grandstanding by the congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative.

Those who don't read liberal blogs, on the other hand, are seeing a spectacle on television in which the news anchors repeatedly say that the congress is "stepping in to save Terry Schiavo" mimicking the unctuous words of Tom Delay as they grovel and leer at the family and nod sympathetically at the sanctimonious phonies who are using this issue for their political gain.

This is why we cannot trust the mainstream media. Most people get their news from television. And television is presenting this issue as a round the clock one dimensional soap opera pitting the "family", the congress and the church against this woman's husband and the judicial system that upheld Terry Schiavo's right and explicit request that she be allowed to die if extraordinary means were required to keep her alive. The ghoulish infotainment industry is making a killing by acceding once again to trumped up right wing sensationalism.

This issue gets to the essence of the culture war. Shall the state be allowed to interfere in the most delicate, complicated personal matters of life, death and health because a particular religious constituency holds that their belief system should override each individual's right to make these personal decisions for him or herself. And it isn't the allegedly statist/communist/socialist left that is agitating for the government to tell Americans how they must live and how they must die.

As an attorney, I am waiting to see if the federal judge who gets this case has the guts to declare the law unconstitutional and dismiss.

When Bush Gets Tort Reform, Only the Rich Will Have Lawyers

From a friend. Here are some of the reasons we call it "tort deform":

Limit your right to Justice: Support Tort Reform

Limit your right to trial: Support Tort Reform

Vote Yes to Tort Reform: Make Insurance Companies Richer

Your Life isn't worth more than $250K: Support Tort Reform

Your dead child isn't worth $250K: Support Tort Reform

Let's limit Accountability: Support Tort Reform

Give Big Business a break: Support Tort Reform

Killed by a Drunk Driver? $250k is all your family needs. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Defective Product take your life? You're not worth $250K. Vote yes for Tort Reform

Know anyone killed, crippled of injured by negligence? It will never happen to you: Support Tort Reform

Know anyone who ever served on a jury? They are stupid. Support Tort Reform.

Ever served on a jury? You can't be trusted to do what's right. Support Tort Reform.

Don't let a jury decide how to spend the insurance company's money, let the lobbyists and legislators decide. Support Tort Reform.

Let the government decide what your life is worth, not the people. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Our Founding Fathers were idiots. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Did someone accidentally kill your family? Don't file a lawsuit, just turn the other cheek. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Maimed by a defective product? Turn to prayer for relief, not to a jury. Support Tort Reform.

Lose your ability to provide for your family in an accident? Don't worry, the government will take care of them. Support Tort Reform.

Your neighbors are too stupid to decide what your amputated leg is worth. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Call your local State Representative and tell them you support Tort Reform. Your dead baby isn't worth $250,000 anyway.

Defective product take your eye? You still have another one. Support Tort Reform.

Every life is precious, but no life is worth more than $250K. Support Tort Reform.

If you believe that life begins at conception, then you know that life is only worth $250,000 when it ends. Support Tort Reform.

It doesn't matter how dangerous a product is because everyone will get the same amount of money no matter how bad they are hurt. Support Tort Reform.

It's wrong to sue somebody for making a mistake. We'll tell everyone at your funeral that you felt that way. Support Tort Reform.

I don't want to pay a few more dollars for a safe product. My health isn't worth that much anyway. Support Tort Reform.

Trade your leg for $250,000? Support Tort reform.

Were your parents killed by the nursing home? Thank them. They actually saved you money because they were going to die anyway. Support Tort Reform.

Just because a product I buy blows up takes both my legs doesn't mean that I should get more than $250,000 from those stupid people serving on a jury. Support Tort Reform.

Money doesn't mean anything to me or my family, especially if you hurt me so bad that I can't work anymore. Support Tort Reform.

A jury doesn't know how much my life is worth, but the government does. Support Tort Reform.

Ask anybody killed by negligence what their life is worth. If they could they would tell you it's not more than $250,000. Vote for Tort Reform.

Don't actually know anyone personally who has won a jackpot jury verdict? Support Tort Reform anyway.

It's okay for doctors and hospitals to kill people. We all make mistakes. Support Tort Reform.

Its okay to forgive the drunk driver that killed you instead of suing him. Your family would rather give forgive than receive money to live on anyway. Support Tort Reform.

Did you lose the person you love to negligence? You'd rather have the loved one back instead of the money anyway. Let the insurance company keep it. They know how to spend it better than you do. Support Tort Reform.

Trade your neighbor's arm for lower insurance premiums. It won't cost you anything will it? Support Tort Reform.

If you are stupid enough to pick a doctor that is negligent, then you don't deserve more than $250,000 if he kills you. Vote yes for Tort Reform.

Just because you burned alive doesn't mean that your landlord should pay you more than $250,000 for violating the building code. Support Tort Reform.

If Bush/Cheney are Re-Elected, Only Halliburton Will Have Lawyers

The insurance industry & the business community spent millions to convince the public that personal injury lawsuits are killing American business. It's a crock -- they just want to be able to operate without checks on their power. If tort reform (which should be known as tort deform) is passed, only businesses will have lawyers. But the court system won't be any faster. The people will be shut out, but folks with money will always find a way in.

U.S. Businesses File Four Times More Lawsuits Than Private Citizens And Are Sanctioned Much More Often for Frivolous Suits

But Corporate America and Their Political Allies Bush and Cheney Campaign to Limit Citizens' Rights to Sue

WASHINGTON - October 4 - American businesses file four times as many lawsuits as do individuals represented by trial attorneys, and they are penalized by judges much more often for pursuing frivolous litigation, according to a report issued today by Public Citizen.

The survey of case filings in two states (Arkansas and Mississippi) and two local jurisdictions (Cook County, Ill., and Philadelphia, Pa.) in 2001 found that businesses were 3.3 to 5.8 times more likely to file lawsuits than were individuals. This comes as businesses and politicians are campaigning to limit citizens' rights to sue over everything from medical malpractice damages to defective products. By way of comparison, the number of American consumers (281 million) outnumbers the number of businesses in America (7 million) by 40 times.

The report also found that businesses and their attorneys were 69 percent more likely than individual tort plaintiffs and their attorneys to be sanctioned by federal judges for filing frivolous claims or defenses. The report, Frequent Filers: Corporate Hypocrisy in Accessing the Courts, is available at http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/tort/myths/articles.cfm?ID=12369 .