88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Bloggers' Note: Following the money trail. Washington Post article attempts to untangle the money web, supporting accountability, and keeping Katrina front and center in its coverage.
88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Two-Thirds of Katrina Donations ExhaustedCharities Faced With Difficult Decisions and Countless Requests as They Spend What Is Left
By Jacqueline L. Salmon and Leef SmithWashington Post Staff WritersMonday, February 27, 2006; A01
Six months after Hurricane Katrina laid waste to the Gulf Coast, charities have disbursed more than $2 billion of the record sums they raised for the storm's victims, leaving less than $1 billion for the monumental task of helping hundreds of thousands of storm victims rebuild their lives, according to a survey by The Washington Post.
Two-thirds of the $3.27 billion raised by private nonprofit organizations and tracked by The Post went to help evacuees and other Katrina victims with immediate needs -- cash, food and temporary shelter, medical care, tarps for damaged homes and school supplies for displaced children.
What's left, say charities and federal officials, will need to be stretched over years to rebuild lives and reconstruct the social fabric of the Gulf Coast -- from job training to mental health counseling to rebuilding the homes of the poor to reestablishing arts organizations and paying clergy as they wait for their congregations to return.
The Post survey, the first detailed examination of the largest outpouring of charity in the nation's history, also found the following:
· The American Red Cross, which was criticized for slow distribution of donations after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, has given out 84 percent of its Katrina and Rita donations.
· 50 cents of each donated dollar went out in cash to victims.
· 6 percent of contributions came in the form of supplies -- building materials, food, water, clothing, heavy equipment -- donated mostly by corporations.
· 56 percent of remaining donations are controlled by faith-based organizations. They include such well-known institutions as Catholic Charities USA and the Salvation Army but also such lower-profile groups as the United Methodist Committee on Relief and United Jewish Communities.
What remains to be done goes well beyond even the staggering costs of rebuilding infrastructure -- projects estimated to require nearly $200 billion in government aid over the long term.
"There are many, many needs that the federal government cannot cover," said Don Powell, a former Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. chairman who was named coordinator of the Gulf's long-term recovery by President Bush in November. Many are "the crucial part of life that we all depend on," he said. "It's not public works. It's not water, sewage or utilities. It's the soul of our life."
No one has put a price tag on restoring the "soul" of a region after such devastation, but the current charitable resources of about $960 million, as calculated by The Post, will not be sufficient, Powell said.
The line between what the government pays for and what charities will cover is blurred. Even though many Gulf Coast residents are eligible for federal assistance for some housing costs, plenty of other residents will not qualify, say charities, who predict they'll have to pick up the slack.
Also, the law that governs federal spending after a disaster strictly limits how much can go to private entities -- places of worships and arts groups, mental health services, youth programs and child-care centers.
The desolate fiscal situations in Mississippi and Louisiana leave those states in no position to cover what the feds cannot. Charity officials say their organizations will try to step into that breach.
For weeks after the storm, Americans and their employers poured hundreds of millions of dollars into charities, churches, synagogues and other religious organizations. Thousands of truckloads of supplies were sent to the Gulf Coast.
The speed of the charitable inflow after Katrina topped the torrid pace of donations after the Sept. 11 attacks, when donations hit the $1 billion mark in six weeks and ultimately rose to $2.8 billion, according to Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy.
Donations to Katrina, in contrast, hit $1 billion in three weeks.
Even so, Katrina presents far broader challenges -- simply because the money must be spread over so many more victims.
"Even if we doubled, tripled or quadrupled what we have, we still wouldn't be able to meet the need," said Gary Lundstrom, director of projects for Samaritan's Purse, which is rebuilding homes along the Mississippi coast and in Louisiana's ravaged St. Bernard Parish with much of its $34 million.
Despite the charitable outpouring, some victims feel shortchanged. And there is often a disconnect between the realities of how much has been contributed and the vastness of the need.
Johnnie and Hurley Smith clung to their bedroom skylight to survive Katrina after eight feet of water inundated their home in Biloxi, Miss. They got $1,000 from the Red Cross to use for daily expenses such as lodging and food, and $100 and a new mattress from the Salvation Army. They also ate Salvation Army and Red Cross meals, and their wrecked home was gutted by a church group.
Nevertheless, Johnnie Smith, 57, says she wishes a little more of the billions in donations had come her way.
"I should have been given more assistance," said Smith, a real estate agent who is still unable to work and needs therapy to deal with the trauma of Katrina. (Her husband, Hurley, is retired.) "There was a lot of money donated, and there is still a lot of money being donated."
Some small groups along the coast complain that the big charities are ignoring them.
Saving Our Selves Coalition, a grass-roots recovery group, relies on funds from smaller organizations and individuals.
"I would hope that the [big charities] won't move like our federal government is moving," said the group's founder, LaTosha Brown. "We're six months out, and people are still up in the air. The resources are not getting to the communities."
Charities are braced for hard decisions as they spend what is left. In December, 1,000 Gulf Coast ministers jammed into a New Orleans hotel ballroom for an agonizing debate over whether $20 million donated to faith organizations by the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund should be divided among many organizations or focused on a few.
Their decision: Rather than funding a "full dinner" for a limited number of groups, many organizations should receive a "sandwich," said the Rev. William Gray III, co-chairman of the fund's ministerial advisory committee.
Disillusioned by the sluggish government response to the storm, some nonprofit organizations are choosing to spend private dollars on projects that might otherwise be publicly funded.
The Baton Rouge Area Foundation has hired planners and other consultants at a cost of $15 million to devise a blueprint for development in southern Louisiana, a task normally taken on by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It also is spending $1.2 million on consultants to map out a regional health care system. The foundation has yet to raise all the needed cash, having exhausted the millions in relief funds it raised earlier.
"We can do it, and we can do it much better" than the federal government, said John Davies, chief executive of the foundation.
And many homeowners and renters are turning to nonprofit groups after failing to qualify for government aid.
"We've been swamped" with inquiries, said Ken Meinert, senior vice president for Habitat for Humanity's Operation Home Delivery project, which is rebuilding 1,000 houses along the coast with the $80 million it has raised. It hopes to raise additional money to build another 1,000 residences.
Catholic Charities USA hopes to build 5,000 housing units for the poor in New Orleans, some of it on church-owned land, leveraging its money with loans and grants, said the Rev. Larry Snyder, the group's chief executive.
The group has so far disbursed $58 million of the $142 million it collected to 76 Catholic Charities agencies and other organizations in 29 states for counseling, job placement and housing.
New Orleans resident Tyler Jones, 45, who lost everything in the storm, said Catholic Charities provided his family with medical care, money for clothes, counseling and other support to get their lives back on track. "They restored my faith and my hope by helping me," said Jones, a New Orleans sheriff's deputy.
In its survey, The Post identified 15 charities that collected the most money, based on a database from the Center on Philanthropy of 141 charities raising money for hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma.
It asked for the amounts collected and how much has been disbursed. It also obtained breakdowns of how much had gone for short-term relief and amounts remaining for long-term recovery.
Some of that money is causing tension on the Gulf Coast.
Doctors struggling to rebuild practices are clashing with emergency clinics set up after the hurricane. The physicians say the free medical care is diverting paying patients from their practices.
For much the same reason, International Aid, a Michigan group that raised $50 million in cash and supplies, has stopped distributing food now that many grocery stores have reopened.
There comes a point, said the Rev. Myles Fish, the group's chief executive, when "you don't want to harm the local economy, so you've got to discontinue the free stuff."
Some charities that have focused on the more immediate needs of the storm's victims are winding down.
The American Red Cross announced earlier this month that it had received enough donations to cover the $2.1 billion cost of its operation and asked donors to give to other hurricane-relief groups.
It is, however, reserving $194 million for its local chapters for long-term recovery, it said.
Other groups focused on longer-term programs are just gearing up.
The United Methodist Committee on Relief, an arm of the United Methodist Church, hasn't completed its strategic plan for the $69.6 million it raised from church collection plates. The group also has a $60 million contract from FEMA.
UMCOR's plan will focus on "case management," assigning paid personnel and volunteers to help the neediest victims get back on their feet over the next four to six years, said Kristin Sachen, UMCOR's assistant general secretary, who oversees the group's relief efforts.
"It is slower," said Sachen of her group's efforts. "It is not emergency work. It is long-term recovery."
Staff researcher Derek Willis contributed to this report.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Monday, February 27, 2006
Sunday, February 26, 2006
A Link: Dubai Ports and Secretary Snow (Bush Secretary of Treasury)
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Blogger's Note: I appreciate the article for connecting the dots. Good investigative reporting includes assimilating seemingly minute points of information and seeing if a picture emerges. This article accomplishes that end.
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
It's just yet another blurry line -
David Lazarus
Sunday, February 26, 2006
SF Chronicle
Say what you will about the propriety -- and national- security implications -- of having a government-owned Middle Eastern company manage major U.S. ports.
What's even more remarkable is that once again President Bush is forced to defend a controversial deal involving a corporate entity linked to a senior member of his administration.
To date, the gold-medal winner in potential corporate-political logrolling has been Vice President Dick Cheney, whose former employer, Halliburton, has received millions of dollars in government contracts in Iraq and elsewhere.
Now we have as silver medalist Treasury Secretary John Snow, who previously served as head of transportation giant CSX Corp. The company sold its global port assets to Dubai Ports World for $1.15 billion a year after Snow left for the White House.
Snow's Treasury Department was the government agency that subsequently vetted and approved the $6.8 billion sale of a British company to state-run Dubai Ports World. The Dubai conglomerate in turn will take over the British firm's management of six U.S. ports.
The Treasury Department says Snow played no role in CSX's dealings with Dubai Ports World.
"If people do look into it, they'll see in fact there's absolutely no personal interest or relationship on the part of Secretary Snow with business activities at CSX Corp.," Tony Fratto, a Treasury spokesman, told reporters last week.
But the situation once again highlights how blurry the line separating political and corporate interests has become. This is the danger of having former CEOs running the country, especially when they come from powerful industries like oil and transportation.
"The potential for conflict of interest is greater today than it's ever been," said Kirk Hanson, executive director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.
The concern, he said, lies not just in an official's affiliation with a former employer but also in the fact that the official typically maintains relationships with executives who remain with the company.
Snow may have had nothing to do with CSX selling its ports division to the Dubai company, Hanson observed. But it's likely that Snow knows high-level people who now work for the Mideast firm.
Dubai Ports World's general counsel, George Dalton, and its head of business development, Matt Leech, came to the company from CSX.
"As more Republican and Democratic officials move into private-sector jobs and then move back into the public sector, you'll see more and more cases like this," Hanson said.
Some critics of the deal, not unreasonably, have noted that two of the 19 hijackers behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were from the United Arab Emirates.
Moreover, 11 of the hijackers -- all Saudis -- flew to the United States from Dubai. And U.S. officials say that Dubai played a central role in Osama bin Laden's financial network prior to the attack.
Last but not least, Dubai was also used by the man called the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan, to quietly provide nuclear technology to Iran and Libya.
On the other hand, Dubai serves as a base for U.S. military activities in the region and is credited by the Bush administration with being an ally in efforts to combat terrorism.
Bush, who has staked his presidency on national-security issues, told reporters last week that he's comfortable with Dubai Ports World overseeing commercial aspects of some of the largest ports in the United States.
"If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward," he insisted.
"This is a company that has played by the rules, that has been cooperative with the United States, a country that's an ally in the war on terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."
What kind of signal does it send, though, to have yet another top administration official linked to yet another controversial corporation entrusted with vital (and profitable) aspects of the nation's defense?
Snow pocketed $33.2 million when he divested his CSX holdings before joining Treasury in 2003.
He got an additional $8 million in deferred compensation a year later and will receive annual pension payments of $79,129.
Snow parlayed a stint as head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 1976-77 to become a lobbyist for the Chessie System railway, which merged with the Seaboard Coast Line in 1980 to form CSX.
He was named president of the company in 1988, chief executive a year later and chairman in 1991. He remained with CSX until Bush tapped him for the Treasury post.
Snow sold CSX's shipping division, CSX Lines, to none other than the Carlyle Group in 2002 for $300 million.
Carlyle is a prominent Washington investment firm that in past years has counted among its associates the likes of former President George H.W. Bush, former Secretary of State James Baker and the bin Laden family (spawning a raft of conspiracy theories).
In 2004, Carlyle turned around and sold off CSX Lines (now called Horizon Lines) to another investment firm, Castle Harlan, for $650 million. Castle Harlan was co-founded by John Castle, a prominent Republican donor.
A few months later, CSX said it was selling its international terminal business to Dubai Ports World, making the Mideast company one of the leading operators of maritime facilities.
And now Dubai Ports World is set to assume management of docks in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia -- with the blessing of Snow's Treasury Department.
Daryl Koehn, executive director of the Center for Business Ethics at Houston's University of St. Thomas, said that even if Snow played no role in any of these events, citizens are right to be concerned.
"There's a smell test that has to be passed in these cases," she said. "The appearance of a conflict can be just as bad as a real conflict when it comes to the trust people place in government."
David Lazarus' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Send tips or feedback to dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.
Page D - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgifile=/c/a/2006/02/26/BUGHIHDT5P1.DTL
Blogger's Note: I appreciate the article for connecting the dots. Good investigative reporting includes assimilating seemingly minute points of information and seeing if a picture emerges. This article accomplishes that end.
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
It's just yet another blurry line -
David Lazarus
Sunday, February 26, 2006
SF Chronicle
Say what you will about the propriety -- and national- security implications -- of having a government-owned Middle Eastern company manage major U.S. ports.
What's even more remarkable is that once again President Bush is forced to defend a controversial deal involving a corporate entity linked to a senior member of his administration.
To date, the gold-medal winner in potential corporate-political logrolling has been Vice President Dick Cheney, whose former employer, Halliburton, has received millions of dollars in government contracts in Iraq and elsewhere.
Now we have as silver medalist Treasury Secretary John Snow, who previously served as head of transportation giant CSX Corp. The company sold its global port assets to Dubai Ports World for $1.15 billion a year after Snow left for the White House.
Snow's Treasury Department was the government agency that subsequently vetted and approved the $6.8 billion sale of a British company to state-run Dubai Ports World. The Dubai conglomerate in turn will take over the British firm's management of six U.S. ports.
The Treasury Department says Snow played no role in CSX's dealings with Dubai Ports World.
"If people do look into it, they'll see in fact there's absolutely no personal interest or relationship on the part of Secretary Snow with business activities at CSX Corp.," Tony Fratto, a Treasury spokesman, told reporters last week.
But the situation once again highlights how blurry the line separating political and corporate interests has become. This is the danger of having former CEOs running the country, especially when they come from powerful industries like oil and transportation.
"The potential for conflict of interest is greater today than it's ever been," said Kirk Hanson, executive director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.
The concern, he said, lies not just in an official's affiliation with a former employer but also in the fact that the official typically maintains relationships with executives who remain with the company.
Snow may have had nothing to do with CSX selling its ports division to the Dubai company, Hanson observed. But it's likely that Snow knows high-level people who now work for the Mideast firm.
Dubai Ports World's general counsel, George Dalton, and its head of business development, Matt Leech, came to the company from CSX.
"As more Republican and Democratic officials move into private-sector jobs and then move back into the public sector, you'll see more and more cases like this," Hanson said.
Some critics of the deal, not unreasonably, have noted that two of the 19 hijackers behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were from the United Arab Emirates.
Moreover, 11 of the hijackers -- all Saudis -- flew to the United States from Dubai. And U.S. officials say that Dubai played a central role in Osama bin Laden's financial network prior to the attack.
Last but not least, Dubai was also used by the man called the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan, to quietly provide nuclear technology to Iran and Libya.
On the other hand, Dubai serves as a base for U.S. military activities in the region and is credited by the Bush administration with being an ally in efforts to combat terrorism.
Bush, who has staked his presidency on national-security issues, told reporters last week that he's comfortable with Dubai Ports World overseeing commercial aspects of some of the largest ports in the United States.
"If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward," he insisted.
"This is a company that has played by the rules, that has been cooperative with the United States, a country that's an ally in the war on terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."
What kind of signal does it send, though, to have yet another top administration official linked to yet another controversial corporation entrusted with vital (and profitable) aspects of the nation's defense?
Snow pocketed $33.2 million when he divested his CSX holdings before joining Treasury in 2003.
He got an additional $8 million in deferred compensation a year later and will receive annual pension payments of $79,129.
Snow parlayed a stint as head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 1976-77 to become a lobbyist for the Chessie System railway, which merged with the Seaboard Coast Line in 1980 to form CSX.
He was named president of the company in 1988, chief executive a year later and chairman in 1991. He remained with CSX until Bush tapped him for the Treasury post.
Snow sold CSX's shipping division, CSX Lines, to none other than the Carlyle Group in 2002 for $300 million.
Carlyle is a prominent Washington investment firm that in past years has counted among its associates the likes of former President George H.W. Bush, former Secretary of State James Baker and the bin Laden family (spawning a raft of conspiracy theories).
In 2004, Carlyle turned around and sold off CSX Lines (now called Horizon Lines) to another investment firm, Castle Harlan, for $650 million. Castle Harlan was co-founded by John Castle, a prominent Republican donor.
A few months later, CSX said it was selling its international terminal business to Dubai Ports World, making the Mideast company one of the leading operators of maritime facilities.
And now Dubai Ports World is set to assume management of docks in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia -- with the blessing of Snow's Treasury Department.
Daryl Koehn, executive director of the Center for Business Ethics at Houston's University of St. Thomas, said that even if Snow played no role in any of these events, citizens are right to be concerned.
"There's a smell test that has to be passed in these cases," she said. "The appearance of a conflict can be just as bad as a real conflict when it comes to the trust people place in government."
David Lazarus' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Send tips or feedback to dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.
Page D - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgifile=/c/a/2006/02/26/BUGHIHDT5P1.DTL
Sunday, January 15, 2006
A Women Socialist as Chilean President
Bloggers Note: She is not only groundbreaking leader for her country, catholic and historically conservative; she has also become the 3rd Socialist or left of center President in Latin America....
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
NYTimes
January 16, 2006
Woman in the News
A Leader Making Peace With Chile's Past
By LARRY ROHTER
SANTIAGO, Chile, Jan. 15 - Michelle Bachelet, who was elected Sunday as president of this male-dominated, prosperous and deeply religious nation of 16 million, is a woman and an agnostic, a guitar-strumming child of the 60's, a former exile who spent part of her childhood in the United States, and a physician who has never before held elective office.
Running as a Socialist on a platform that promised "change with continuity" and showcased her warmth and affinity with ordinary people, Ms. Bachelet, a fair-haired, vibrant 54-year-old, won more than 53 percent of the vote, according to the official tally. She made few promises beyond "social inclusion" - vowing to better meet the needs of women and the poor - and preserving Chile's economy, the most dynamic in Latin America, and the country's close ties with the United States.
But Ms. Bachelet has other qualities that explain how, in barely a decade, she has gone from being a pediatrician at a humble, underfinanced clinic here to the first woman to be her country's chief of state, and one of only a handful of women elected to lead any country in the Americas.
Some of those qualities are personal, while others stem from her real and symbolic connections to Chile's recent history. She is a toughened survivor of the Pinochet dictatorship, which was responsible for her father's death and her imprisonment, torture and exile, and she embodies for many Chile's painful reconciliation with those dark years.
"Violence ravaged my life," Ms. Bachelet said Sunday night, in an impassioned victory speech to a jubilant crowd gathered on the main downtown avenue here. "I was a victim of hatred, and I have dedicated my life to reversing that hatred."
Verónica Michelle Bachelet Jeria was born in Santiago on Sept. 29, 1951, the second child of an air force officer who rose to a general's rank and a housewife who became an archaeologist. Her early years were spent in the restrictive but sheltering environment of the Chilean Armed Forces, moving from one military base to another around the country.
In 1962, her father, Alberto Bachelet Martínez, was assigned to the military mission at the Chilean Embassy in Washington. For almost two years, the family lived in Bethesda, a Maryland suburb, where Ms. Bachelet attended middle school, learned to speak English fluently and developed a lifelong love of pop and folk music.
"It was hard for her in the beginning," Ms. Bachelet's mother, Ángela Jeria, recalled in an interview here last week. "For the first three months, she cried when she came home from school, because she didn't understand any of what was being said. But after six months she was fully integrated, and so we were able to travel around and get to know the United States and Canada and visit places like Niagara Falls and Rehoboth Beach."
Friends and relatives recall that the pre-adolescent Ms. Bachelet was shocked by the racial segregation she saw in America and by the assassination of John F. Kennedy. She returned to Chile with her family at the end of 1963, and encountered many other influences that would mark the 60's generation, from the Beatles to the debate over the war in Vietnam and the May 1968 uprising of students in France.
"We were teenagers immersed in the political and social movements that were transforming Chile and the world," said a cousin, Alicia Galdames, with whom Ms. Bachelet formed a folk duo whose repertoire included songs of Joan Baez and Bob Dylan. "The seeds of her ideals were planted in this period."
Ms. Bachelet's enrollment in college coincided with the start here of the left-wing Popular Unity government of Salvador Allende. She studied medicine at her father's urging and joined the youth wing of the Socialist Party. Colleagues remember her as holding views that were moderate for an era that became the most polarized in Chilean history.
"She was really studious, very disciplined and responsible and sure of herself, but with a tremendous capacity for empathy," said Gladys Cuevas, a fellow student and close friend. "It was a time of black and white, but she managed to get along with everybody, no matter what their political persuasion. She wasn't one to look for fights; on the contrary, she was the one who was tolerant, always looking for consensus."
With food shortages growing in Chile and a black market developing, her father was lent by the air force to the Allende government and put in charge of food rationing and distribution, where he worked closely with the Socialists and other leftists. When Gen. Augusto Pinochet led the coup that overthrew the Allende government on Sept. 11, 1973, the military viewed General Bachelet with suspicion. Spurning a chance to go into exile, he was jailed, and in March 1974, after months of torture, died in prison of a heart attack.
Months later, both Ms. Bachelet and her mother were detained and sent to Villa Grimaldi, one of the most notorious of the Pinochet dictatorship's secret prisons. While there, Ms. Bachelet was also subjected to physical and psychological torture - being hit during interrogations, blindfolded and tied to a chair for long periods, and told that her mother would be executed. She minimized those experiences in an interview in 2002, saying, "There were others, even in my own cell, who had it much worse than I did."
"I haven't forgotten," she said. "It left pain. But I have tried to channel that pain into a constructive realm. I insist on the idea that what we experienced here in Chile was so painful, so terrible, that I wouldn't wish for anyone to live through our situation again."
Ms. Bachelet and her mother were freed within months, thanks to the lobbying of an Air Force general who was a relative. They went into exile in 1975, first in Australia, where her older brother Alberto had moved, and then, after a few months, to East Germany, at the request of the Socialist Party directorate, which wanted them to take part in Chile solidarity campaigns in Europe.
Initially, Ms. Bachelet worked as a hospital orderly and lived with her mother in Potsdam. But she resumed her medical studies at Humboldt University in East Berlin, after she became proficient in German.
While in exile, Ms. Bachelet married Jorge Dávalos, an architect and fellow exile, and gave birth to the first of her three children, Jorge Sebastián Alberto, now 27. The marriage ended in the mid-1980's, after a second child, Francisca, 21, was born here. Ms. Bachelet has not married again, though she has a third child, Sofía, 13, from a now-lapsed relationship with a doctor.
Upon her return to Chile in 1979, as the expulsion order against her mother was being lifted, Ms. Bachelet finished medical school, specializing in pediatrics and public health. Though she graduated near the top of her class, her family name and political affiliations made it difficult for her to find employment. She ended up working at a clinic financed by Sweden that treated children from families that had been victims of torture and political repression.
She remained there through the rest of the Pinochet dictatorship, which ended in 1990 after elections put in power the center-left coalition that still governs Chile. In 1994, after having worked in AIDS and epidemiological programs, she became an adviser to the Ministry of Health. But she retained her familial fascination with military affairs, and in 1996 enrolled in a program in strategic studies at the national war college.
Ms. Bachelet excelled there, and was invited to study at the Inter-American Defense College in Washington. She did so in 1997, and after her return, she went to work in the Defense Ministry and was also elected to the political commission of the Socialist Party, specializing in defense and military issues.
Six years ago this month, Chile elected a Socialist president, Ricardo Lagos, for the first time since the fall of Mr. Allende. Mr. Lagos appointed Ms. Bachelet minister of health. In that capacity, she became identified with a partly successful campaign to reduce waiting time for patients and emerged as a familiar figure at hospitals and clinics all over Chile.
After two years, Ms. Bachelet was shifted to lead the Defense Ministry, becoming the first woman to hold that post, and she became nationally known, photographed in an armored vehicle, inspecting troops and wearing army camouflage or an aviator's leather jacket on her official rounds.
The symbolism of her leadership of the institution that had killed her father appealed greatly to Chileans trying to reconcile with their bitter past.
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
NYTimes
January 16, 2006
Woman in the News
A Leader Making Peace With Chile's Past
By LARRY ROHTER
SANTIAGO, Chile, Jan. 15 - Michelle Bachelet, who was elected Sunday as president of this male-dominated, prosperous and deeply religious nation of 16 million, is a woman and an agnostic, a guitar-strumming child of the 60's, a former exile who spent part of her childhood in the United States, and a physician who has never before held elective office.
Running as a Socialist on a platform that promised "change with continuity" and showcased her warmth and affinity with ordinary people, Ms. Bachelet, a fair-haired, vibrant 54-year-old, won more than 53 percent of the vote, according to the official tally. She made few promises beyond "social inclusion" - vowing to better meet the needs of women and the poor - and preserving Chile's economy, the most dynamic in Latin America, and the country's close ties with the United States.
But Ms. Bachelet has other qualities that explain how, in barely a decade, she has gone from being a pediatrician at a humble, underfinanced clinic here to the first woman to be her country's chief of state, and one of only a handful of women elected to lead any country in the Americas.
Some of those qualities are personal, while others stem from her real and symbolic connections to Chile's recent history. She is a toughened survivor of the Pinochet dictatorship, which was responsible for her father's death and her imprisonment, torture and exile, and she embodies for many Chile's painful reconciliation with those dark years.
"Violence ravaged my life," Ms. Bachelet said Sunday night, in an impassioned victory speech to a jubilant crowd gathered on the main downtown avenue here. "I was a victim of hatred, and I have dedicated my life to reversing that hatred."
Verónica Michelle Bachelet Jeria was born in Santiago on Sept. 29, 1951, the second child of an air force officer who rose to a general's rank and a housewife who became an archaeologist. Her early years were spent in the restrictive but sheltering environment of the Chilean Armed Forces, moving from one military base to another around the country.
In 1962, her father, Alberto Bachelet Martínez, was assigned to the military mission at the Chilean Embassy in Washington. For almost two years, the family lived in Bethesda, a Maryland suburb, where Ms. Bachelet attended middle school, learned to speak English fluently and developed a lifelong love of pop and folk music.
"It was hard for her in the beginning," Ms. Bachelet's mother, Ángela Jeria, recalled in an interview here last week. "For the first three months, she cried when she came home from school, because she didn't understand any of what was being said. But after six months she was fully integrated, and so we were able to travel around and get to know the United States and Canada and visit places like Niagara Falls and Rehoboth Beach."
Friends and relatives recall that the pre-adolescent Ms. Bachelet was shocked by the racial segregation she saw in America and by the assassination of John F. Kennedy. She returned to Chile with her family at the end of 1963, and encountered many other influences that would mark the 60's generation, from the Beatles to the debate over the war in Vietnam and the May 1968 uprising of students in France.
"We were teenagers immersed in the political and social movements that were transforming Chile and the world," said a cousin, Alicia Galdames, with whom Ms. Bachelet formed a folk duo whose repertoire included songs of Joan Baez and Bob Dylan. "The seeds of her ideals were planted in this period."
Ms. Bachelet's enrollment in college coincided with the start here of the left-wing Popular Unity government of Salvador Allende. She studied medicine at her father's urging and joined the youth wing of the Socialist Party. Colleagues remember her as holding views that were moderate for an era that became the most polarized in Chilean history.
"She was really studious, very disciplined and responsible and sure of herself, but with a tremendous capacity for empathy," said Gladys Cuevas, a fellow student and close friend. "It was a time of black and white, but she managed to get along with everybody, no matter what their political persuasion. She wasn't one to look for fights; on the contrary, she was the one who was tolerant, always looking for consensus."
With food shortages growing in Chile and a black market developing, her father was lent by the air force to the Allende government and put in charge of food rationing and distribution, where he worked closely with the Socialists and other leftists. When Gen. Augusto Pinochet led the coup that overthrew the Allende government on Sept. 11, 1973, the military viewed General Bachelet with suspicion. Spurning a chance to go into exile, he was jailed, and in March 1974, after months of torture, died in prison of a heart attack.
Months later, both Ms. Bachelet and her mother were detained and sent to Villa Grimaldi, one of the most notorious of the Pinochet dictatorship's secret prisons. While there, Ms. Bachelet was also subjected to physical and psychological torture - being hit during interrogations, blindfolded and tied to a chair for long periods, and told that her mother would be executed. She minimized those experiences in an interview in 2002, saying, "There were others, even in my own cell, who had it much worse than I did."
"I haven't forgotten," she said. "It left pain. But I have tried to channel that pain into a constructive realm. I insist on the idea that what we experienced here in Chile was so painful, so terrible, that I wouldn't wish for anyone to live through our situation again."
Ms. Bachelet and her mother were freed within months, thanks to the lobbying of an Air Force general who was a relative. They went into exile in 1975, first in Australia, where her older brother Alberto had moved, and then, after a few months, to East Germany, at the request of the Socialist Party directorate, which wanted them to take part in Chile solidarity campaigns in Europe.
Initially, Ms. Bachelet worked as a hospital orderly and lived with her mother in Potsdam. But she resumed her medical studies at Humboldt University in East Berlin, after she became proficient in German.
While in exile, Ms. Bachelet married Jorge Dávalos, an architect and fellow exile, and gave birth to the first of her three children, Jorge Sebastián Alberto, now 27. The marriage ended in the mid-1980's, after a second child, Francisca, 21, was born here. Ms. Bachelet has not married again, though she has a third child, Sofía, 13, from a now-lapsed relationship with a doctor.
Upon her return to Chile in 1979, as the expulsion order against her mother was being lifted, Ms. Bachelet finished medical school, specializing in pediatrics and public health. Though she graduated near the top of her class, her family name and political affiliations made it difficult for her to find employment. She ended up working at a clinic financed by Sweden that treated children from families that had been victims of torture and political repression.
She remained there through the rest of the Pinochet dictatorship, which ended in 1990 after elections put in power the center-left coalition that still governs Chile. In 1994, after having worked in AIDS and epidemiological programs, she became an adviser to the Ministry of Health. But she retained her familial fascination with military affairs, and in 1996 enrolled in a program in strategic studies at the national war college.
Ms. Bachelet excelled there, and was invited to study at the Inter-American Defense College in Washington. She did so in 1997, and after her return, she went to work in the Defense Ministry and was also elected to the political commission of the Socialist Party, specializing in defense and military issues.
Six years ago this month, Chile elected a Socialist president, Ricardo Lagos, for the first time since the fall of Mr. Allende. Mr. Lagos appointed Ms. Bachelet minister of health. In that capacity, she became identified with a partly successful campaign to reduce waiting time for patients and emerged as a familiar figure at hospitals and clinics all over Chile.
After two years, Ms. Bachelet was shifted to lead the Defense Ministry, becoming the first woman to hold that post, and she became nationally known, photographed in an armored vehicle, inspecting troops and wearing army camouflage or an aviator's leather jacket on her official rounds.
The symbolism of her leadership of the institution that had killed her father appealed greatly to Chileans trying to reconcile with their bitter past.
January Birthdays
Hey fellow CAPS -- A happy Birthday Month, celebrate it all month, in light of our B-Days always overshadowed by the holidaze.
Inaki Dec-27
Rona Dec-30
Stef Dec-30
Robyn Jan-2
Sal Jan-4
Angelamia Jan-6
Donal Jan-8
Moi --Jan 3
JERALDINE SAUNDERS also provides daily forecasts for every zodiac sign in Sydney Omarr's Astrology 2005 Calendar, available wherever books and calendars are sold.
DECEMBER 27 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Uranus, the planet of revolutionary change, may be only one sign away -- but it should liven your life and stir fresh ideas in March. Maybe you will prefer to follow unique ideas or break away from tradition then. But 2005 can remind you to follow rules and regulations in the early fall when Saturn passes through your opposite sign and corrals you back into conventional activity. Enjoy freedom now but prepare to knuckle down and work hard to get ahead with career and reputation in the last quarter of 2005.
DECEMBER 30 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: You can easily break free of limitations that hold you back and shine brightly within your own sphere in the coming year. Uranus, the planet of dynamic change, will be influencing your sector of the zodiac off and on all year. Grab any opportunities that appear in February to permanently improve some part of your life and use them as a springboard to dive into a more exciting way of living. New people in your life may come and go, but they will touch you in some dynamic and electrifying way. You will emerge from 2005 with an altered perspective and a new set of exciting motivations.
JANUARY 2 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Rather than climbing the ladder of success, you may be tempted to scale the walls barehanded. Your sense of adventure is accentuated in the year ahead and you are likely to march to the beat of a different drummer. April is the month to make an inspired choice and change your life permanently for the better. From June through October your vibrant personality draws others to your side, so it is generally a good time to push for career advancement -- especially if you deal with the public. However, don't take chances or make deals in July as your strength of character could be tested.
JANUARY 3 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: In the coming year you will win the most appreciation by being friendly and innovative. You will gain confidence in your ability to adeptly find out what you need to know and use it to your advantage. April is your month to be blessed by the answer to many of your prayers when restrictions lift and favors are easily granted. Keep a low profile during July -- postpone vacations or significant purchases. Your popularity is at a high point in October when new friends can be brought into your life and significant changes are possible.
JANUARY 4 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Plumbing the depth of your perceptions can help you uncover ways to improve the direction of your life. If you act in good faith and remain open minded you can achieve lasting prosperity in the year ahead. From the middle of April through the middle of May keep an eye peeled for any chances to make life a little easier. You may be rewarded for your hard work and changes that are put into motion then can lift you to a higher level of financial comfort. Early August is a time to sit on your hands and avoid initiating anything of importance.
JANUARY 6 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: You are sensitive to your surroundings in the year to come and may feel healthier and more vibrant than ever. Be sure to keep company with uplifting people and maintain a pleasant environment to reinforce the best of what the year may offer. Grab hold of the brass ring and accept a prize in mid-June when good fortune is most likely to come your way. Be cautious and avoid signing contracts or neglecting responsibilities in August. In late September your luck will change to the better.
My apologies for Donal Jan 8, I could not locate a birthday horoscope
Year 2006 Overview
Provided by Astrology.com
Capricorn
With Saturn -- heavenly purveyor of many sought-after qualities like integrity, responsibility and discipline -- as your ruler, you're an inspiration to everyone around you. So whether your current companion is by your side for platonic, professional or romantic reasons this year won't really matter. They'll just be proud to be with you. And while you're not ordinarily fond of the spotlight, you'd better try to get used to it, because it will be just about impossible to avoid. In fact, the attention, admiration and applause of the masses will be around every corner for you this year -- and it's your own darned fault.
You began working hard to achieve your professional goals (especially that reputation for fairness and benevolence) around late summer 2005. The response from coworkers and higher-ups has been terrific ever since, but don't forget that all this has happened for one reason: because you've put in the time and effort to make it happen. But 2005 was really just practice -- 2006 is your year to shine. Don't you dare try to avoid the accolades!
In other news, you'll also have plenty of romantic opportunities to pursue this year. You're due to meet someone -- or finally notice someone -- in January or February. This particular someone will be entertaining, magnetic and spontaneous enough to keep you interested for a good long time. (It's a good thing, too, because you're definitely not in the mood for games.) If you're happily attached, keeping it that way won't be tough at all, especially from April through August. You and your sweetie will probably be getting along so well, in fact, that you may temporarily disappear from your social circle's 'active' list.
Oh well. It's good to hibernate every now and then -- especially when puttering around together in your PJs sounds far better than taking a chauffeured limo ride to the opera. All in all, life will be good, thanks to your number one squeeze -- and you've certainly earned it. Kick back and enjoy the fruits of your labor and the company of your loved ones. Then, with your unselfish motives intact, get out there and spread your blessings around!
Inaki Dec-27
Rona Dec-30
Stef Dec-30
Robyn Jan-2
Sal Jan-4
Angelamia Jan-6
Donal Jan-8
Moi --Jan 3
JERALDINE SAUNDERS also provides daily forecasts for every zodiac sign in Sydney Omarr's Astrology 2005 Calendar, available wherever books and calendars are sold.
DECEMBER 27 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Uranus, the planet of revolutionary change, may be only one sign away -- but it should liven your life and stir fresh ideas in March. Maybe you will prefer to follow unique ideas or break away from tradition then. But 2005 can remind you to follow rules and regulations in the early fall when Saturn passes through your opposite sign and corrals you back into conventional activity. Enjoy freedom now but prepare to knuckle down and work hard to get ahead with career and reputation in the last quarter of 2005.
DECEMBER 30 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: You can easily break free of limitations that hold you back and shine brightly within your own sphere in the coming year. Uranus, the planet of dynamic change, will be influencing your sector of the zodiac off and on all year. Grab any opportunities that appear in February to permanently improve some part of your life and use them as a springboard to dive into a more exciting way of living. New people in your life may come and go, but they will touch you in some dynamic and electrifying way. You will emerge from 2005 with an altered perspective and a new set of exciting motivations.
JANUARY 2 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Rather than climbing the ladder of success, you may be tempted to scale the walls barehanded. Your sense of adventure is accentuated in the year ahead and you are likely to march to the beat of a different drummer. April is the month to make an inspired choice and change your life permanently for the better. From June through October your vibrant personality draws others to your side, so it is generally a good time to push for career advancement -- especially if you deal with the public. However, don't take chances or make deals in July as your strength of character could be tested.
JANUARY 3 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: In the coming year you will win the most appreciation by being friendly and innovative. You will gain confidence in your ability to adeptly find out what you need to know and use it to your advantage. April is your month to be blessed by the answer to many of your prayers when restrictions lift and favors are easily granted. Keep a low profile during July -- postpone vacations or significant purchases. Your popularity is at a high point in October when new friends can be brought into your life and significant changes are possible.
JANUARY 4 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: Plumbing the depth of your perceptions can help you uncover ways to improve the direction of your life. If you act in good faith and remain open minded you can achieve lasting prosperity in the year ahead. From the middle of April through the middle of May keep an eye peeled for any chances to make life a little easier. You may be rewarded for your hard work and changes that are put into motion then can lift you to a higher level of financial comfort. Early August is a time to sit on your hands and avoid initiating anything of importance.
JANUARY 6 IS YOUR BIRTHDAY: You are sensitive to your surroundings in the year to come and may feel healthier and more vibrant than ever. Be sure to keep company with uplifting people and maintain a pleasant environment to reinforce the best of what the year may offer. Grab hold of the brass ring and accept a prize in mid-June when good fortune is most likely to come your way. Be cautious and avoid signing contracts or neglecting responsibilities in August. In late September your luck will change to the better.
My apologies for Donal Jan 8, I could not locate a birthday horoscope
Year 2006 Overview
Provided by Astrology.com
Capricorn
With Saturn -- heavenly purveyor of many sought-after qualities like integrity, responsibility and discipline -- as your ruler, you're an inspiration to everyone around you. So whether your current companion is by your side for platonic, professional or romantic reasons this year won't really matter. They'll just be proud to be with you. And while you're not ordinarily fond of the spotlight, you'd better try to get used to it, because it will be just about impossible to avoid. In fact, the attention, admiration and applause of the masses will be around every corner for you this year -- and it's your own darned fault.
You began working hard to achieve your professional goals (especially that reputation for fairness and benevolence) around late summer 2005. The response from coworkers and higher-ups has been terrific ever since, but don't forget that all this has happened for one reason: because you've put in the time and effort to make it happen. But 2005 was really just practice -- 2006 is your year to shine. Don't you dare try to avoid the accolades!
In other news, you'll also have plenty of romantic opportunities to pursue this year. You're due to meet someone -- or finally notice someone -- in January or February. This particular someone will be entertaining, magnetic and spontaneous enough to keep you interested for a good long time. (It's a good thing, too, because you're definitely not in the mood for games.) If you're happily attached, keeping it that way won't be tough at all, especially from April through August. You and your sweetie will probably be getting along so well, in fact, that you may temporarily disappear from your social circle's 'active' list.
Oh well. It's good to hibernate every now and then -- especially when puttering around together in your PJs sounds far better than taking a chauffeured limo ride to the opera. All in all, life will be good, thanks to your number one squeeze -- and you've certainly earned it. Kick back and enjoy the fruits of your labor and the company of your loved ones. Then, with your unselfish motives intact, get out there and spread your blessings around!
Friday, December 30, 2005
Cuba hails arrival of 'comrade Morales'
Scotsman.com News
International
The Scotsman
Sat 31 Dec 2005
Cuba hails arrival of 'comrade Morales'
MARC FRANK IN HAVANA
FIDEL Castro, the president of Cuba, yesterday welcomed Latin America's latest left-wing leader, Evo Morales, Bolivia's president-elect, to discuss political, economic and social co-operation.
A beaming Mr Castro greeted Mr Morales with a warm embrace. They have known each other for years.
"It appears the map is changing," Mr Castro said.
Mr Morales, an avowed socialist, chose communist Cuba for his first trip abroad since his overwhelming election victory two weeks ago.
"The Cubans are going to offer massive medical and educational assistance, like they did with Venezuela when Hugo Chavez became president," a Latin American diplomat predicted.
A government statement hailed Mr Morales's arrival on the eve of the 47th anniversary of the Cuban revolution that brought Mr Castro to power on 1 January, 1959.
"The presence of comrade Morales in Cuba fills our people with satisfaction and is an important stimulus to strengthen friendship and co-operation between the Cuban government and the future Bolivian government," the statement said.
Much to the chagrin of the United States, at 79 Mr Castro is less and less isolated in Latin America as left and centre-left parties come to power and strengthen their ties with Cuba.
Uruguay, Brazil and Argentina are all governed by progressive-minded independents, Mr Chavez has become Mr Castro's main ally and all Caribbean governments have restored diplomatic ties with Havana.
Like Mr Chavez and Mr Castro, Mr Morales is a fierce critic of the Bush administration and a supporter of Latin American integration.
©2005 Scotsman.com
International
The Scotsman
Sat 31 Dec 2005
Cuba hails arrival of 'comrade Morales'
MARC FRANK IN HAVANA
FIDEL Castro, the president of Cuba, yesterday welcomed Latin America's latest left-wing leader, Evo Morales, Bolivia's president-elect, to discuss political, economic and social co-operation.
A beaming Mr Castro greeted Mr Morales with a warm embrace. They have known each other for years.
"It appears the map is changing," Mr Castro said.
Mr Morales, an avowed socialist, chose communist Cuba for his first trip abroad since his overwhelming election victory two weeks ago.
"The Cubans are going to offer massive medical and educational assistance, like they did with Venezuela when Hugo Chavez became president," a Latin American diplomat predicted.
A government statement hailed Mr Morales's arrival on the eve of the 47th anniversary of the Cuban revolution that brought Mr Castro to power on 1 January, 1959.
"The presence of comrade Morales in Cuba fills our people with satisfaction and is an important stimulus to strengthen friendship and co-operation between the Cuban government and the future Bolivian government," the statement said.
Much to the chagrin of the United States, at 79 Mr Castro is less and less isolated in Latin America as left and centre-left parties come to power and strengthen their ties with Cuba.
Uruguay, Brazil and Argentina are all governed by progressive-minded independents, Mr Chavez has become Mr Castro's main ally and all Caribbean governments have restored diplomatic ties with Havana.
Like Mr Chavez and Mr Castro, Mr Morales is a fierce critic of the Bush administration and a supporter of Latin American integration.
©2005 Scotsman.com
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Bush bubble burst by troubled 2005
FROM THE BBC
Bush bubble burst by troubled 2005
By Matt Frei BBC News, Washington
This time last year the graphic artists at Time Magazine were putting the finishing touches to an oil portrait of President Bush.
Two months after his re-election the picture would grace its cover and celebrate him as the recipient of one of the most eagerly awaited accolades in the US media, the person of the year award (2004): George W Bush, "revolutionary president".
Twelve months later the same man finds himself again on the cover of a magazine.
This time it is Newsweek and the commander in chief looks impish and helpless inside a soap bubble floating over the headline: "Bush's world. The isolated president. Can he change?"
President Bush has become "bubble boy", according to the New York Times, and his revolution seems to have popped.
Before most of Washington prepared to flee the capital for the holidays they dealt with one final pre-Christmas surprise.
Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: 'extraordinary renditions', 'black sites' and 'water boarding'
The New York Times published an article, which it had been sitting on for a year, according to which the president personally allowed the super-secret National Security Agency to bug the e-mails and phone calls of Americans without getting the requisite approval of a secret court.
After a day's embarrassed silence the White House decided to go on the offensive, claiming that Congress had given Mr Bush the green light to use all necessary means to protect the country after 9/11.
Democrats - and quite a few Republicans - jumped up and said: "We only allowed you to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and defeat the Taleban. We didn't permit you to bug Americans without court approval!"
It is not clear whether this scandal will survive the Christmas turkey and the recess, but it has raised an issue at the heart of this presidency: How far can the president push his executive powers in the middle of a war?
Low political capital
George Bush has no doubt had his share of difficult years before, but in political terms 2005 must go down as his worst year in office.
His approval ratings had plummeted and are only now inching their way up the ladder.
The political capital he sought to spend after his re-election has been squandered on the flopped mission to reform social security.
The renewal of the Patriot Act, once considered a keystone piece of post-9/11 legislation in the war on terror, came unstuck in Congress.
Harriet Miers - his personal lawyer, friend and cherished pick for the Supreme Court - was humiliated and then hounded from nomination even though
President Bush had given "his word" that she was the right choice.
The president has been forced to back-pedal on the much heralded overhaul of immigration, thanks to opposition from his own party.
At the end of 2005 there is a lot to be depressed about around the White House Christmas tree. But in the current gloom it is easy to miss the seeds of recovery
Hurricane Katrina showed the alarming shortcomings of the administration in disaster relief, an area it had prided itself on.
Criminal indictments have washed up on the doorstep of the White House. His chief lieutenant on Capitol Hill, Tom DeLay, aka "the hammer", is facing the gavel of justice in Texas, over allegations that he misused corporate funds for election campaigns.
And hanging over everything is a war of choice that continues to haemorrhage lives, money and public support. Iraq will decide the president's legacy and will probably do so next year.
Torture, security and liberty
Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: "extraordinary renditions", "black sites" and "water boarding".
The land of the free is debating exactly how painful the enhanced interrogation of prisoners needs to be before it can be called torture.
According to the administration anything short of organ failure and death is OK.
According to the Oxford dictionary and the Geneva Conventions that is going too far.
As a friend of mine - a Republican - put it over the din of a recent child's birthday party: "I am not surprised the rest of the world hates us!"
In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition
Despite 9/11, America is still a nation more comfortable with being loved than hated.
Today even supporters of the president are wondering whether in the tussle between liberty and security that defines the war on terror, liberty is biting the dust and security is creating some serious "blowback".
A week before Christmas, the White House was forced to bow to the wishes of John McCain, a Republican senator, who had himself been tortured during the Vietnam War.
He argued persuasively that even the most limited application of torture is morally reprehensible, politically counter-productive and ultimately misleading, because people tend to lie under torture just to make the pain go away.
Senator McCain did in Hanoi. His torturers asked him for a list of American spies and air crews.
He gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers football team and they went away satisfied.
Seeds of recovery
At the end of 2005 there is a lot to be depressed about around the White House Christmas tree.
But in the current gloom it is easy to miss the seeds of recovery.
The Iraqi parliamentary elections have turned out to be a resounding success. The Sunnis have broken the shackles of fear to flock to the polls in droves.
The challenge of building a viable coalition government is immense but the democratic instinct in Iraq is alive and kicking and that vindicates the president.
Moreover much of the security for the voting was provided by newly trained Iraqi troops.
The administration has already outlined the exit strategy from Iraq: as Iraqi troops stand up, American soldiers can stand down.
If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006 the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals
If the coming months of coalition horse trading don't disintegrate into chaos and the training of Iraqi troops continues apace - both admittedly big "ifs" - it is possible that the insurgency will lose its quorum of support and become marginalised.
In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition.
The president who was famous for never admitting fault cannot stop saying sorry: about failed intelligence on WMD; about strategic mishaps in handling the insurgency; about not being welcomed with bouquets of flowers.
The fragile Christmas bauble of contrition is then wrapped in the crisp paper of defiance: "We won't cut and run! We will do what it takes to achieve total victory."
Those who favour immediate withdrawal are labelled cowards. The mixture of defiance and contrition seems to work.
The most recent opinion polls have the president recovering just enough lost ground to end the year on a higher note.
Robust growth
Mr Bush's biggest assets are the apparent determination of the Iraqi people to rebuild their own country and the inability of the Democrats to proffer any coherent alternatives to the current policy.
In one corner Senator Joe Lieberman - who has been tipped by the rumour mill as a possible replacement for Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon - cries out that any criticism of the president is detrimental to the troops.
In the other corner, respected veterans like Rep Jack Murtha charge that the administration has bungled and that the troops should come home soon.
Meanwhile the economy has refused to tank. US growth is robust.
The US Federal Reserve is expected to slow down if not shelve the string of interest rate rises, Americans are spending less on petrol than they were two months ago and the barrage of hurricanes that careened through the Gulf Coast has done less damage to the economy than most soothsayers had predicted.
If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006, the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals.
The 2005 State of the Union address soared rhetorically to Mars and Middle East democracy. The next one could strike a humbler note.
The spirit of 9/11, when the administration wrapped every political move in the Stars and Stripes and even the opposition was afraid to ask awkward questions, is wearing off.
Officially America is at war - in Iraq and against terror - but most Americans don't feel as if they are living in a time of sacrifice. This is the schizophrenia of the second Bush term.
Starting on 4 January, 2006, Matt Frei will be writing a fortnightly diary from Washington for the BBC News website.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4550302.stmPublished: 2005/12/22 11:06:34 GMT© BBC MMV
Bush bubble burst by troubled 2005
By Matt Frei BBC News, Washington
This time last year the graphic artists at Time Magazine were putting the finishing touches to an oil portrait of President Bush.
Two months after his re-election the picture would grace its cover and celebrate him as the recipient of one of the most eagerly awaited accolades in the US media, the person of the year award (2004): George W Bush, "revolutionary president".
Twelve months later the same man finds himself again on the cover of a magazine.
This time it is Newsweek and the commander in chief looks impish and helpless inside a soap bubble floating over the headline: "Bush's world. The isolated president. Can he change?"
President Bush has become "bubble boy", according to the New York Times, and his revolution seems to have popped.
Before most of Washington prepared to flee the capital for the holidays they dealt with one final pre-Christmas surprise.
Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: 'extraordinary renditions', 'black sites' and 'water boarding'
The New York Times published an article, which it had been sitting on for a year, according to which the president personally allowed the super-secret National Security Agency to bug the e-mails and phone calls of Americans without getting the requisite approval of a secret court.
After a day's embarrassed silence the White House decided to go on the offensive, claiming that Congress had given Mr Bush the green light to use all necessary means to protect the country after 9/11.
Democrats - and quite a few Republicans - jumped up and said: "We only allowed you to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and defeat the Taleban. We didn't permit you to bug Americans without court approval!"
It is not clear whether this scandal will survive the Christmas turkey and the recess, but it has raised an issue at the heart of this presidency: How far can the president push his executive powers in the middle of a war?
Low political capital
George Bush has no doubt had his share of difficult years before, but in political terms 2005 must go down as his worst year in office.
His approval ratings had plummeted and are only now inching their way up the ladder.
The political capital he sought to spend after his re-election has been squandered on the flopped mission to reform social security.
The renewal of the Patriot Act, once considered a keystone piece of post-9/11 legislation in the war on terror, came unstuck in Congress.
Harriet Miers - his personal lawyer, friend and cherished pick for the Supreme Court - was humiliated and then hounded from nomination even though
President Bush had given "his word" that she was the right choice.
The president has been forced to back-pedal on the much heralded overhaul of immigration, thanks to opposition from his own party.
At the end of 2005 there is a lot to be depressed about around the White House Christmas tree. But in the current gloom it is easy to miss the seeds of recovery
Hurricane Katrina showed the alarming shortcomings of the administration in disaster relief, an area it had prided itself on.
Criminal indictments have washed up on the doorstep of the White House. His chief lieutenant on Capitol Hill, Tom DeLay, aka "the hammer", is facing the gavel of justice in Texas, over allegations that he misused corporate funds for election campaigns.
And hanging over everything is a war of choice that continues to haemorrhage lives, money and public support. Iraq will decide the president's legacy and will probably do so next year.
Torture, security and liberty
Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: "extraordinary renditions", "black sites" and "water boarding".
The land of the free is debating exactly how painful the enhanced interrogation of prisoners needs to be before it can be called torture.
According to the administration anything short of organ failure and death is OK.
According to the Oxford dictionary and the Geneva Conventions that is going too far.
As a friend of mine - a Republican - put it over the din of a recent child's birthday party: "I am not surprised the rest of the world hates us!"
In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition
Despite 9/11, America is still a nation more comfortable with being loved than hated.
Today even supporters of the president are wondering whether in the tussle between liberty and security that defines the war on terror, liberty is biting the dust and security is creating some serious "blowback".
A week before Christmas, the White House was forced to bow to the wishes of John McCain, a Republican senator, who had himself been tortured during the Vietnam War.
He argued persuasively that even the most limited application of torture is morally reprehensible, politically counter-productive and ultimately misleading, because people tend to lie under torture just to make the pain go away.
Senator McCain did in Hanoi. His torturers asked him for a list of American spies and air crews.
He gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers football team and they went away satisfied.
Seeds of recovery
At the end of 2005 there is a lot to be depressed about around the White House Christmas tree.
But in the current gloom it is easy to miss the seeds of recovery.
The Iraqi parliamentary elections have turned out to be a resounding success. The Sunnis have broken the shackles of fear to flock to the polls in droves.
The challenge of building a viable coalition government is immense but the democratic instinct in Iraq is alive and kicking and that vindicates the president.
Moreover much of the security for the voting was provided by newly trained Iraqi troops.
The administration has already outlined the exit strategy from Iraq: as Iraqi troops stand up, American soldiers can stand down.
If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006 the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals
If the coming months of coalition horse trading don't disintegrate into chaos and the training of Iraqi troops continues apace - both admittedly big "ifs" - it is possible that the insurgency will lose its quorum of support and become marginalised.
In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition.
The president who was famous for never admitting fault cannot stop saying sorry: about failed intelligence on WMD; about strategic mishaps in handling the insurgency; about not being welcomed with bouquets of flowers.
The fragile Christmas bauble of contrition is then wrapped in the crisp paper of defiance: "We won't cut and run! We will do what it takes to achieve total victory."
Those who favour immediate withdrawal are labelled cowards. The mixture of defiance and contrition seems to work.
The most recent opinion polls have the president recovering just enough lost ground to end the year on a higher note.
Robust growth
Mr Bush's biggest assets are the apparent determination of the Iraqi people to rebuild their own country and the inability of the Democrats to proffer any coherent alternatives to the current policy.
In one corner Senator Joe Lieberman - who has been tipped by the rumour mill as a possible replacement for Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon - cries out that any criticism of the president is detrimental to the troops.
In the other corner, respected veterans like Rep Jack Murtha charge that the administration has bungled and that the troops should come home soon.
Meanwhile the economy has refused to tank. US growth is robust.
The US Federal Reserve is expected to slow down if not shelve the string of interest rate rises, Americans are spending less on petrol than they were two months ago and the barrage of hurricanes that careened through the Gulf Coast has done less damage to the economy than most soothsayers had predicted.
If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006, the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals.
The 2005 State of the Union address soared rhetorically to Mars and Middle East democracy. The next one could strike a humbler note.
The spirit of 9/11, when the administration wrapped every political move in the Stars and Stripes and even the opposition was afraid to ask awkward questions, is wearing off.
Officially America is at war - in Iraq and against terror - but most Americans don't feel as if they are living in a time of sacrifice. This is the schizophrenia of the second Bush term.
Starting on 4 January, 2006, Matt Frei will be writing a fortnightly diary from Washington for the BBC News website.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4550302.stmPublished: 2005/12/22 11:06:34 GMT© BBC MMV
Go see it -- Brokeback Mountain
It is a lush film, tells a story well ---one of the oldest facing human kind—LOVE; and it will likely be considered a classic, one referred to as an exemplary achievement in filmmaking.
As my film companion stated, how remarkable, where almost every frame is part of the simple story told in its own time. Lush, you can almost smell the sheep, feel the cold of the coming snow –the pictorial and emotional detail all play part in supporting the stories time/speed.
Love, as the window pan nearing the end, emblematic of "the possibility" of a life lived and not pursued with conviction and passion. Not passion in a pedestrian sense, cheapened by the moralist, but passion with the heart aflame, or life filling draught. Love that bears friendship, love that crosses time/distance-scape, and a quiet reassurance of feeling something unlike what is known.
The cinematographer, editor, director, actors, and nature itself seemed to have agreed to cooperate in the nuance passing of time through this film. There also doesn’t seem to be a wasted gesture or overtly indulgent scene, a short story turned into an epic. The music and silence worked together as vehicle for keeping time and emoting what cannot be expressed. To the men and women who contributed to Brokeback Mountain, the accolades and perhaps the box office returns are well deserved.
I will share more after seeing it again. This is a big screen film. A DVD may be nice to have in one’s collection, but it needs the giant screen to experience the vast terrain of the film. This could be one of the best contemporary films I’ve seen.
As my film companion stated, how remarkable, where almost every frame is part of the simple story told in its own time. Lush, you can almost smell the sheep, feel the cold of the coming snow –the pictorial and emotional detail all play part in supporting the stories time/speed.
Love, as the window pan nearing the end, emblematic of "the possibility" of a life lived and not pursued with conviction and passion. Not passion in a pedestrian sense, cheapened by the moralist, but passion with the heart aflame, or life filling draught. Love that bears friendship, love that crosses time/distance-scape, and a quiet reassurance of feeling something unlike what is known.
The cinematographer, editor, director, actors, and nature itself seemed to have agreed to cooperate in the nuance passing of time through this film. There also doesn’t seem to be a wasted gesture or overtly indulgent scene, a short story turned into an epic. The music and silence worked together as vehicle for keeping time and emoting what cannot be expressed. To the men and women who contributed to Brokeback Mountain, the accolades and perhaps the box office returns are well deserved.
I will share more after seeing it again. This is a big screen film. A DVD may be nice to have in one’s collection, but it needs the giant screen to experience the vast terrain of the film. This could be one of the best contemporary films I’ve seen.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
From the Director -- Brokeback Mountain
Blogger's Comment:
It has been two weeks since it's release, the film seem to have gained traction both among the critics and the audience. The film has landed on the top 10 ten grossing movies, of note this one distributed in less than 1000 screens (WashBlade). Friends who've seen it, tell me go. Will do so when wider distribution/decreasing interest provides for budget conscious film goers.
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Ang Lee on What Asians, Gays and Cowboys Share
Asian Week, Q & A, Joy Guan, Dec 17, 2005
Director Ang Lee has a history of being a trailblazer, and his new film, Brokeback Mountain, is no exception, both in subject matter and cinematic style. He made his directorial debut with Pushing Hands (1992), followed by The Wedding Banquet in 1993, which garnered film festival awards as well as Golden Globe and Academy Award nominations.Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000) is considered one of Lee’s greatest works and is America’s highest-grossing foreign-language film. Lee is also one of the first Chinese-born directors to cross cultures telling stories with no Asian content or actors, including Sense and Sensibility (1995), The Ice Storm (1997), Ride with the Devil (1999), and The Incredible Hulk (2003)
AW: How do you select the films that you work on, and what characterizes a signature Ang Lee film?
At heart, I am a dramatist, and love dramatic elements and conflict. A signature Ang Lee film addresses the conflict between personal free will, and social pressures or obligation. Nice guys always struggle, and I like to peel the comfortable covers off and explore that uncomfortable zone, which is revealed when common codes of behavior are violated. A subcurrent of repression always runs through my films. … If a project is not scary and sensitive, then it’s probably less interesting to me.My upbringing in Taiwan makes my interest in these stories extremely personal. Growing up, my artistic leanings were always repressed because there was always pressure to do something “useful” like be a doctor.
AW: Part of what makes your films so powerful is your unwavering attention to detail and authenticity. How do you immerse yourself in cultures completely different from yours?Various stories require different genres, and I like the genre-hopping very much, as I get the opportunity to work with vastly different societies and film crews.In terms of creating authenticity in order to portray a [different] culture — I just try my best to survive because the material possesses me. I am attracted to the unfamiliar and am curious to find out why I am so moved when I find a compelling story. When I’m possessed, I tend to forget about the danger ground. You feel very dumb when you don’t know about something and there will always be an awkward learning curve.Creating authenticity is not that hard compared to evoking the intended reaction from audiences.
AW: Many Asian directors and actors seem to be typecast and work in only one genre or culture. Have you ever felt limited by people’s expectations?
It’s easy to be pigeonholed. I am more free from that because I generate and choose my own material. Since release of The Wedding Banquet, I have developed relationships with international distributors, giving me more freedom and control over how my films are released. I don’t do big Hollywood movies [The Incredible Hulk is an exception], so the trade-off is we don’t have huge budgets and need to be budget-conscious. My cross-cultural body of work does seem to be unique amongst Asian filmmakers.I’m like a rolling stone; I don’t like to gather moss and always need to keep fresh. Many directors are not comfortable with the trade-offs of doing that. For instance, John Woo may want to do something different, but won’t get the budget, creating a barrier for him to branch out from the genre and style that people seek him out for.AW: What is the anticipated reaction for this film from both critics and the general public, and how does the feedback affect you?So far the reaction to Brokeback Mountain has been very positive, and it’s a story with lots of deep emotion. I’m not sure what to expect, although some denial is expected — some people will claim that there are no gays in Wyoming, although of course there are. At the same time, the subject matter of this film is different because it addresses universal feelings — above all, it is a romantic love story, and probably won’t be mislabeled as merely a gay film.
AW: ‘The Wedding Banquet’ was a story of cultural and generational differences between a gay New Yorker and his Taiwanese parents; does ‘Brokeback Mountain’ feel similar? To me, these two stories are very different. The Wedding Banquet is a family drama, originally made for a mainstream Taiwanese audience. It is a comedy of mannerisms and a social commentary. Brokeback Mountain deals with the secrecy of a homosexual lifestyle and is fundamentally a story about romance.
AW: Your love seems to be for drama and storytelling –– do you see yourself producing anything other than films?
The infrastructure that supports my filmmaking is my sense of social obligation –– the feeling that there are stories to be told. I am a filmmaker at heart, and am happy to make one movie after another. For me, this is the best medium for me to communicate and reveal the drama of the human condition.
AW: Cowboys are not known for openly expressing their emotions. Asians share a similar stereotype. Do you see any parallels between Asians and cowboys in how they deal with taboo sexual subjects such as homosexuality?
I see the themes of repression in Brokeback Mountain as being universal regardless of culture. However, it is true that Eastern culture and the nature of cowboys share a certain indirectness, quiet nature, and use of body language to communicate that are quite similar. There are similarities in the art of the two cultures as well –– they both emphasize feelings of sadness, melancholy, and expansive space through various media.The difference is that Western culture is more macho, whereas Eastern culture is –– more lunar and feminine in nature. Thus, when it comes to attitudes about homosexuality, my personal theory is that Eastern culture is more relaxed than in the West. This stems from a difference in why a culture perceives homosexuality to be wrong –– in Western culture, it stems from religion, and you are condemned if you are gay. Eastern culture seems more, flexible –– and being gay is more of a social issue than a religious one; there is no deity to offend. The West also seems to tolerate lesbians more than gays because it’s a very macho culture; homosexuality is not okay because it threatens this culture. Of course, this is my observation in general –– I am sure that there are happy gay ranch hands in Wyoming with very sensitive neighbors as well.
Dec 19, 2005
Ang Lee on What Asians, Gays and Cowboys Share
New America Media is a project of Pacific News Service Copyright © Pacific News ServiceEngine Powered by DW Alliance
It has been two weeks since it's release, the film seem to have gained traction both among the critics and the audience. The film has landed on the top 10 ten grossing movies, of note this one distributed in less than 1000 screens (WashBlade). Friends who've seen it, tell me go. Will do so when wider distribution/decreasing interest provides for budget conscious film goers.
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Ang Lee on What Asians, Gays and Cowboys Share
Asian Week, Q & A, Joy Guan, Dec 17, 2005
Director Ang Lee has a history of being a trailblazer, and his new film, Brokeback Mountain, is no exception, both in subject matter and cinematic style. He made his directorial debut with Pushing Hands (1992), followed by The Wedding Banquet in 1993, which garnered film festival awards as well as Golden Globe and Academy Award nominations.Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000) is considered one of Lee’s greatest works and is America’s highest-grossing foreign-language film. Lee is also one of the first Chinese-born directors to cross cultures telling stories with no Asian content or actors, including Sense and Sensibility (1995), The Ice Storm (1997), Ride with the Devil (1999), and The Incredible Hulk (2003)
AW: How do you select the films that you work on, and what characterizes a signature Ang Lee film?
At heart, I am a dramatist, and love dramatic elements and conflict. A signature Ang Lee film addresses the conflict between personal free will, and social pressures or obligation. Nice guys always struggle, and I like to peel the comfortable covers off and explore that uncomfortable zone, which is revealed when common codes of behavior are violated. A subcurrent of repression always runs through my films. … If a project is not scary and sensitive, then it’s probably less interesting to me.My upbringing in Taiwan makes my interest in these stories extremely personal. Growing up, my artistic leanings were always repressed because there was always pressure to do something “useful” like be a doctor.
AW: Part of what makes your films so powerful is your unwavering attention to detail and authenticity. How do you immerse yourself in cultures completely different from yours?Various stories require different genres, and I like the genre-hopping very much, as I get the opportunity to work with vastly different societies and film crews.In terms of creating authenticity in order to portray a [different] culture — I just try my best to survive because the material possesses me. I am attracted to the unfamiliar and am curious to find out why I am so moved when I find a compelling story. When I’m possessed, I tend to forget about the danger ground. You feel very dumb when you don’t know about something and there will always be an awkward learning curve.Creating authenticity is not that hard compared to evoking the intended reaction from audiences.
AW: Many Asian directors and actors seem to be typecast and work in only one genre or culture. Have you ever felt limited by people’s expectations?
It’s easy to be pigeonholed. I am more free from that because I generate and choose my own material. Since release of The Wedding Banquet, I have developed relationships with international distributors, giving me more freedom and control over how my films are released. I don’t do big Hollywood movies [The Incredible Hulk is an exception], so the trade-off is we don’t have huge budgets and need to be budget-conscious. My cross-cultural body of work does seem to be unique amongst Asian filmmakers.I’m like a rolling stone; I don’t like to gather moss and always need to keep fresh. Many directors are not comfortable with the trade-offs of doing that. For instance, John Woo may want to do something different, but won’t get the budget, creating a barrier for him to branch out from the genre and style that people seek him out for.AW: What is the anticipated reaction for this film from both critics and the general public, and how does the feedback affect you?So far the reaction to Brokeback Mountain has been very positive, and it’s a story with lots of deep emotion. I’m not sure what to expect, although some denial is expected — some people will claim that there are no gays in Wyoming, although of course there are. At the same time, the subject matter of this film is different because it addresses universal feelings — above all, it is a romantic love story, and probably won’t be mislabeled as merely a gay film.
AW: ‘The Wedding Banquet’ was a story of cultural and generational differences between a gay New Yorker and his Taiwanese parents; does ‘Brokeback Mountain’ feel similar? To me, these two stories are very different. The Wedding Banquet is a family drama, originally made for a mainstream Taiwanese audience. It is a comedy of mannerisms and a social commentary. Brokeback Mountain deals with the secrecy of a homosexual lifestyle and is fundamentally a story about romance.
AW: Your love seems to be for drama and storytelling –– do you see yourself producing anything other than films?
The infrastructure that supports my filmmaking is my sense of social obligation –– the feeling that there are stories to be told. I am a filmmaker at heart, and am happy to make one movie after another. For me, this is the best medium for me to communicate and reveal the drama of the human condition.
AW: Cowboys are not known for openly expressing their emotions. Asians share a similar stereotype. Do you see any parallels between Asians and cowboys in how they deal with taboo sexual subjects such as homosexuality?
I see the themes of repression in Brokeback Mountain as being universal regardless of culture. However, it is true that Eastern culture and the nature of cowboys share a certain indirectness, quiet nature, and use of body language to communicate that are quite similar. There are similarities in the art of the two cultures as well –– they both emphasize feelings of sadness, melancholy, and expansive space through various media.The difference is that Western culture is more macho, whereas Eastern culture is –– more lunar and feminine in nature. Thus, when it comes to attitudes about homosexuality, my personal theory is that Eastern culture is more relaxed than in the West. This stems from a difference in why a culture perceives homosexuality to be wrong –– in Western culture, it stems from religion, and you are condemned if you are gay. Eastern culture seems more, flexible –– and being gay is more of a social issue than a religious one; there is no deity to offend. The West also seems to tolerate lesbians more than gays because it’s a very macho culture; homosexuality is not okay because it threatens this culture. Of course, this is my observation in general –– I am sure that there are happy gay ranch hands in Wyoming with very sensitive neighbors as well.
Dec 19, 2005
Ang Lee on What Asians, Gays and Cowboys Share
New America Media is a project of Pacific News Service Copyright © Pacific News ServiceEngine Powered by DW Alliance
Friday, December 09, 2005
Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off
Blogger's Note: A segment of the proponents arguing that Christmas without Christ is something to boycott stores over, how about Christmas Mass on a Sunday? What is wrong with this picture? better yet, watch it in your home dvd.
We do not need a Limbaugh to lampoon the Evangelicals, they do a pretty good job left to themselves. Yes, they will also eat their young, better yet send them off to war and be chosen for slaughter, good christians they profess to be.
88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
NYTIMES
December 9, 2005
When Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Some of the nation's most prominent megachurches have decided not to hold worship services on the Sunday that coincides with Christmas Day, a move that is generating controversy among evangelical Christians at a time when many conservative groups are battling to "put the Christ back in Christmas."
Megachurch leaders say that the decision is in keeping with their innovative and "family friendly" approach and that they are compensating in other ways. Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., always a pacesetter among megachurches, is handing out a DVD it produced for the occasion that features a heartwarming contemporary Christmas tale.
"What we're encouraging people to do is take that DVD and in the comfort of their living room, with friends and family, pop it into the player and hopefully hear a different and more personal and maybe more intimate Christmas message, that God is with us wherever we are," said Cally Parkinson, communications director at Willow Creek, which draws 20,000 people on a typical Sunday.
Megachurches have long been criticized for offering "theology lite," but some critics say that this time the churches have gone too far in the quest to make Christianity accessible to spiritual seekers.
"I see this in many ways as a capitulation to narcissism, the self-centered, me-first, I'm going to put me and my immediate family first agenda of the larger culture," said Ben Witherington III, professor of New Testament interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky. "If Christianity is an evangelistic religion, then what kind of message is this sending to the larger culture - that worship is an optional extra?"
John D. Witvliet, director of the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship at Calvin College, asked: "What about the people in society without strong family connections? The elderly, single people a long distance from family, or people who are simply lonely and for whom church and prayers would be a significant part of their day?"
The uproar is not only over closing the churches on Christmas Day, because some evangelical churches large and small have done that in recent years and made Christmas Eve the big draw, without attracting much criticism.
What some consider the deeper affront is in canceling services on a Sunday, which most Christian churches consider the Lord's Day, when communal worship is an obligation. The last time Christmas fell on a Sunday was in 1994. Some of these same megachurches remained open them, they say, but found attendance sparse.
Since then, the perennial culture wars over the secularization of Christmas have intensified, and this year the scuffles are especially lively. Conservative Christian groups are boycotting stores that fail to mention
"Christmas" in their holiday greetings or advertising campaigns. Schools are being pressured to refer to the December vacation as "Christmas break." Even the White House came under attack this week for sending out cards with best wishes for the "holiday season."
When the office of Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia sent out a press release last Friday announcing plans for a "holiday tree" lighting, a half-hour later it sent out another saying, "It is in fact a Christmas tree."
For years, it has been an open secret that many mainline Protestant churches are half empty - or worse - on Christmas Day. The churches' emphasis has been instead on the days leading up to Christmas, with Christmas Eve attracting the most worshipers. Some of the megachurches closing on Christmas this year have increased the number of services in the days before.
But for the vast majority of the other churches, closing down on Christmas Sunday would be unthinkable.
"I can't even imagine not observing Christmas in an Episcopal church," said Robert Williams, a spokesman for the Episcopal Church USA. "The only thing I could think of would be a summer chapel that might be shut down anyway."
In many Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, known for their rich liturgical traditions, Christmas Day attracts far more worshippers than an average Sunday. Grown children return with their parents to the parishes they belonged to when they were young.
"From the Catholic perspective, the whole purpose of the holiday is to celebrate it as a religious holiday in the company of the community, and for Catholics that means at Mass," said Robert J. Miller, director of research and planning in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Canceling worship on Christmas Day appears to be predominantly a megachurch phenomenon, sociologists of religion say.
"This attachment to a particular day on the calendar is just not something that megachurches have been known for," Nancy Ammerman, a sociologist of religion at Boston University, said. "They're known for being flexible and creative, and not for taking these traditions, seasons, dates and symbols really seriously."
At least eight megachurches have canceled their Christmas services. They are only a fraction of the 1,200 or so in the country, but they are influential, Scott Thumma, a sociologist of religion at Hartford Seminary, said. The trend has been reported in The Lexington Herald-Leader and in other newspapers.
Besides Willow Creek, the churches include Southland Christian Church in Nicholasville, Ky.; Crossroads Christian Church in Lexington, Ky.; Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Tex.; Redemption World Outreach Center in Greenville, S.C.; North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Ga.; First Baptist in Atlanta; and Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Mich.
Many other megachurches that are staying open on Christmas Day are holding fewer services than they would on a typical Sunday. New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, in Lithonia, Ga., with about 25,000 members, will hold only one of its usual two services this Christmas Day.
Bishop Eddie L. Long, the senior pastor, said that his church was "always promoting family," and that many members of his congregation were transplants to the Atlanta area who traveled far away to be with their families on Christmas.
"We're encouraging our members to do a family worship," Bishop Long said. "They could wake up and read Scripture and pray and sometimes sing a song, and go over the true meaning of what Christmas is, before opening up their gifts. It keeps them together and not running off to get dressed up to go off to church."
His church offers streaming video of the Sunday service, and Bishop Long said he expected a spike in viewers this Christmas. "They have an option if they want to join their family around the computer and worship with us," he said.
Staff members at Willow Creek said they had had few complaints from members about the church closing on Christmas. Said the Rev. Mark Ashton, whose title is pastor of spiritual discovery: "We've always been a church that's been on the edge of innovation. We've been willing to try and experiment, so this is another one of those innovations."
The real question is not why churches are skipping Christmas, but why individual Christians are skipping church on the second holiest day on the Christian calendar next to Easter, said Mr. Thumma.
"I think these critics who decry the megachurches should really be aiming their barbs at individual Christians who are willing to stay at home around the Christmas tree instead of coming and giving at least part of that day to the meaning of the holiday," he said. "They should be facing up to the reality of that."
We do not need a Limbaugh to lampoon the Evangelicals, they do a pretty good job left to themselves. Yes, they will also eat their young, better yet send them off to war and be chosen for slaughter, good christians they profess to be.
88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
NYTIMES
December 9, 2005
When Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Some of the nation's most prominent megachurches have decided not to hold worship services on the Sunday that coincides with Christmas Day, a move that is generating controversy among evangelical Christians at a time when many conservative groups are battling to "put the Christ back in Christmas."
Megachurch leaders say that the decision is in keeping with their innovative and "family friendly" approach and that they are compensating in other ways. Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., always a pacesetter among megachurches, is handing out a DVD it produced for the occasion that features a heartwarming contemporary Christmas tale.
"What we're encouraging people to do is take that DVD and in the comfort of their living room, with friends and family, pop it into the player and hopefully hear a different and more personal and maybe more intimate Christmas message, that God is with us wherever we are," said Cally Parkinson, communications director at Willow Creek, which draws 20,000 people on a typical Sunday.
Megachurches have long been criticized for offering "theology lite," but some critics say that this time the churches have gone too far in the quest to make Christianity accessible to spiritual seekers.
"I see this in many ways as a capitulation to narcissism, the self-centered, me-first, I'm going to put me and my immediate family first agenda of the larger culture," said Ben Witherington III, professor of New Testament interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky. "If Christianity is an evangelistic religion, then what kind of message is this sending to the larger culture - that worship is an optional extra?"
John D. Witvliet, director of the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship at Calvin College, asked: "What about the people in society without strong family connections? The elderly, single people a long distance from family, or people who are simply lonely and for whom church and prayers would be a significant part of their day?"
The uproar is not only over closing the churches on Christmas Day, because some evangelical churches large and small have done that in recent years and made Christmas Eve the big draw, without attracting much criticism.
What some consider the deeper affront is in canceling services on a Sunday, which most Christian churches consider the Lord's Day, when communal worship is an obligation. The last time Christmas fell on a Sunday was in 1994. Some of these same megachurches remained open them, they say, but found attendance sparse.
Since then, the perennial culture wars over the secularization of Christmas have intensified, and this year the scuffles are especially lively. Conservative Christian groups are boycotting stores that fail to mention
"Christmas" in their holiday greetings or advertising campaigns. Schools are being pressured to refer to the December vacation as "Christmas break." Even the White House came under attack this week for sending out cards with best wishes for the "holiday season."
When the office of Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia sent out a press release last Friday announcing plans for a "holiday tree" lighting, a half-hour later it sent out another saying, "It is in fact a Christmas tree."
For years, it has been an open secret that many mainline Protestant churches are half empty - or worse - on Christmas Day. The churches' emphasis has been instead on the days leading up to Christmas, with Christmas Eve attracting the most worshipers. Some of the megachurches closing on Christmas this year have increased the number of services in the days before.
But for the vast majority of the other churches, closing down on Christmas Sunday would be unthinkable.
"I can't even imagine not observing Christmas in an Episcopal church," said Robert Williams, a spokesman for the Episcopal Church USA. "The only thing I could think of would be a summer chapel that might be shut down anyway."
In many Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, known for their rich liturgical traditions, Christmas Day attracts far more worshippers than an average Sunday. Grown children return with their parents to the parishes they belonged to when they were young.
"From the Catholic perspective, the whole purpose of the holiday is to celebrate it as a religious holiday in the company of the community, and for Catholics that means at Mass," said Robert J. Miller, director of research and planning in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Canceling worship on Christmas Day appears to be predominantly a megachurch phenomenon, sociologists of religion say.
"This attachment to a particular day on the calendar is just not something that megachurches have been known for," Nancy Ammerman, a sociologist of religion at Boston University, said. "They're known for being flexible and creative, and not for taking these traditions, seasons, dates and symbols really seriously."
At least eight megachurches have canceled their Christmas services. They are only a fraction of the 1,200 or so in the country, but they are influential, Scott Thumma, a sociologist of religion at Hartford Seminary, said. The trend has been reported in The Lexington Herald-Leader and in other newspapers.
Besides Willow Creek, the churches include Southland Christian Church in Nicholasville, Ky.; Crossroads Christian Church in Lexington, Ky.; Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Tex.; Redemption World Outreach Center in Greenville, S.C.; North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Ga.; First Baptist in Atlanta; and Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Mich.
Many other megachurches that are staying open on Christmas Day are holding fewer services than they would on a typical Sunday. New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, in Lithonia, Ga., with about 25,000 members, will hold only one of its usual two services this Christmas Day.
Bishop Eddie L. Long, the senior pastor, said that his church was "always promoting family," and that many members of his congregation were transplants to the Atlanta area who traveled far away to be with their families on Christmas.
"We're encouraging our members to do a family worship," Bishop Long said. "They could wake up and read Scripture and pray and sometimes sing a song, and go over the true meaning of what Christmas is, before opening up their gifts. It keeps them together and not running off to get dressed up to go off to church."
His church offers streaming video of the Sunday service, and Bishop Long said he expected a spike in viewers this Christmas. "They have an option if they want to join their family around the computer and worship with us," he said.
Staff members at Willow Creek said they had had few complaints from members about the church closing on Christmas. Said the Rev. Mark Ashton, whose title is pastor of spiritual discovery: "We've always been a church that's been on the edge of innovation. We've been willing to try and experiment, so this is another one of those innovations."
The real question is not why churches are skipping Christmas, but why individual Christians are skipping church on the second holiest day on the Christian calendar next to Easter, said Mr. Thumma.
"I think these critics who decry the megachurches should really be aiming their barbs at individual Christians who are willing to stay at home around the Christmas tree instead of coming and giving at least part of that day to the meaning of the holiday," he said. "They should be facing up to the reality of that."
Jesus Bans "Christian" Group
Blogger's Note: Friday levity not leviticus.
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Jesus Bans "Christian" Group Shocking announcement sends militant Focus on the Family organization into crazed tailspin -
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
Friday, December 9, 2005
In an astonishing but not completely unexpected announcement, Jesus H. Christ, vice president and CFO of All That Is Inc., appeared today on a large tortilla at a roadside taco stand in Zacatecas, Mexico, to announce that, effective immediately, the pseudo-Christian group Focus on the Family, led by Dr. James Dobson and best known for its blazing hatred of gays and its fear of glimpsing the human female nipple during nationally televised sporting events, is effectively banned from His Divine Beneficence.
"What happened was, the heavens and all spirits of goodness, along with Buddha and Shiva and Allah and Kali and a few others, well, we were having some margaritas and playing poker and tossing around recent headlines, when Allah chimed in that this Focus on the Family group -- a real scab on my big toe for years, I gotta tell you -- well, they just decided to yank all their accounts from a bank over the bank's support of gay rights," said Jesus, dressed in black Diesel jeans, Hugo Boss motorcycle boots and a snug tank top featuring a large OM symbol across the chest.
"J-Dog," as he is known to his friends, was referring, of course, to the recent story about how the militant, Colorado-based "Christian" group has just pulled all its accounts from Wells Fargo Bank after learning that the bank had donated a small sum of money to gay rights causes, including GLAAD, a sum totaling about $50,000, or about one-tenth of what Wells Fargo gave to the GOP last year.
The Christ, apparently, had had enough.
"This is what I realized: Rampant homophobia, ignorance of sex, derision of women's rights, a decided love of tepid dogmatic sameness at the expense of the luminosity and uniqueness of the individual human soul -- it was all just too much," Jesus said, this time appearing as a curiously shaped oil stain on a freeway underpass in Saragossa, Spain. "Then the bank thing happened and it was the straw that broke the Mary's back."
It was, apparently, the right response. "Totally in the moment," said Buddha, nodding vigorously in agreement. "It's about time," Vishnu sighed, painting his nails beet red and lighting some Nag Champa incense. "It's decisive and it sends a message," agreed Kali, counting her poker winnings. "You guys have any hummus?" Allah muttered, rifling through Christ's well-stocked fridge and not really paying attention.
"A slight ban is definitely in order," Christ continued, calmly, now appearing in a pile of instant mashed potatoes in a truck stop in Bowling Green, Ky., where his visage appeared to be weeping, but which Jesus said was merely caused by all the onions he'd been chopping to make his famed "Holy Christ!" hot salsa for the Seraphim Christmas office party.
"Nothing serious, just maybe three, four thousand years wherein these Focus on the Family nutballs and especially this hateful Dobson fellow shall receive only sporadic blessings and deferred prayer responses and will have to go all the way to the back of the line, behind Dick Cheney and Tim LaHaye and Mel Gibson, to await salvation."
"Hell, I still love them all. Even Dobson," the One added, flashing his trademark dazzling, compassionate grin. "I just don't like them very much."
When the news reached Focus on the Family's Colorado Springs headquarters, stunned members were seen running into walls and bashing their foreheads with large Bibles and ramming their Toyota Corollas and Ford pickups into each other and muttering incoherent lines from "Passion of the Christ" and popping Prozac like M&M's.
"Where are the Ken dolls! Someone get to the dungeon and make sure my Ken doll collection is safe!" screamed James Dobson himself, emerging from a secret room in a fuchsia leotard and launching into a bizarre rant no one could quite understand. Reporters seeking comment could only look at each other in stunned silence, wishing they could be in a bar somewhere.
In related news, the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, another right-wing, anti-gay Christian group that allegedly pressured Ford Motor Co. into yanking much of its advertising from upscale gay publications, has, apparently, accidentally banned itself.
"Someone who is no longer in the organization had the bright idea that we should ban any American company or group that supported the outright ignorance of Christ's true message," sighed AFA chairman Donald Wildmon, chugging from a large bottle of Red Bull and stroking the hairless cat in his lap and making a strange hissing noise with his tongue. "Hell, it sounded great at the 'Harry Potter' book-burning rally. But then again, most everyone was buzzed on spiked Kool-Aid and Kumbaya pie."
"Turns out, when all votes were counted, the group that most needed banning, besides the Catholic church and Dobson's clan, was us. Apparently, we have no real clue as to what Christ truly stood for. Who knew?"
Effective immediately, the AFA's ban on itself means its members will no longer be able support or endorse anything it says or does, until further notice from itself.
"It makes shopping, like, totally impossible," said Beth-Ann Binderbottom, mother of nine and AFA member for the past 17 years and devout watcher of "Touched by an Angel" and committed scourer of all live radio and TV programming for any trace of female nipples, curse words or Jessica Simpson's butt.
"Due to the ban on myself, I now I have to buy the exact opposite of everything I would normally buy," she lamented. "What the gosh-golly heck am I supposed to do with all these green vegetables, Tom Robbins books, bottles of wine and hot porn DVDs?"
Christ, who will be in negotiations with the lords of the underworld next week about what can be done about Jerry Falwell, summarized it this way: "Hell, at the root of it, we're all pagans," JC said with a wink, from a lovely pattern of bark on an old-growth sycamore in a heavily wooded forest somewhere in Bavaria.
Thoughts for the author? E-mail him.
Mark Morford's Notes & Errata column appears every Wednesday and Friday on SF Gate and in the Datebook section of the SF Chronicle. To get on the e-mail list for this column, please click here and remove one article of clothing. Mark's column also has an RSS feed and an archive of past columns, which includes a tiny photo of Mark probably insufficient for you to recognize him in the street and give him gifts.
As if that weren't enough, Mark also contributes to the hot, spankin' SF Gate Culture Blog.
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/12/09/notes120905.DTL
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Jesus Bans "Christian" Group Shocking announcement sends militant Focus on the Family organization into crazed tailspin -
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
Friday, December 9, 2005
In an astonishing but not completely unexpected announcement, Jesus H. Christ, vice president and CFO of All That Is Inc., appeared today on a large tortilla at a roadside taco stand in Zacatecas, Mexico, to announce that, effective immediately, the pseudo-Christian group Focus on the Family, led by Dr. James Dobson and best known for its blazing hatred of gays and its fear of glimpsing the human female nipple during nationally televised sporting events, is effectively banned from His Divine Beneficence.
"What happened was, the heavens and all spirits of goodness, along with Buddha and Shiva and Allah and Kali and a few others, well, we were having some margaritas and playing poker and tossing around recent headlines, when Allah chimed in that this Focus on the Family group -- a real scab on my big toe for years, I gotta tell you -- well, they just decided to yank all their accounts from a bank over the bank's support of gay rights," said Jesus, dressed in black Diesel jeans, Hugo Boss motorcycle boots and a snug tank top featuring a large OM symbol across the chest.
"J-Dog," as he is known to his friends, was referring, of course, to the recent story about how the militant, Colorado-based "Christian" group has just pulled all its accounts from Wells Fargo Bank after learning that the bank had donated a small sum of money to gay rights causes, including GLAAD, a sum totaling about $50,000, or about one-tenth of what Wells Fargo gave to the GOP last year.
The Christ, apparently, had had enough.
"This is what I realized: Rampant homophobia, ignorance of sex, derision of women's rights, a decided love of tepid dogmatic sameness at the expense of the luminosity and uniqueness of the individual human soul -- it was all just too much," Jesus said, this time appearing as a curiously shaped oil stain on a freeway underpass in Saragossa, Spain. "Then the bank thing happened and it was the straw that broke the Mary's back."
It was, apparently, the right response. "Totally in the moment," said Buddha, nodding vigorously in agreement. "It's about time," Vishnu sighed, painting his nails beet red and lighting some Nag Champa incense. "It's decisive and it sends a message," agreed Kali, counting her poker winnings. "You guys have any hummus?" Allah muttered, rifling through Christ's well-stocked fridge and not really paying attention.
"A slight ban is definitely in order," Christ continued, calmly, now appearing in a pile of instant mashed potatoes in a truck stop in Bowling Green, Ky., where his visage appeared to be weeping, but which Jesus said was merely caused by all the onions he'd been chopping to make his famed "Holy Christ!" hot salsa for the Seraphim Christmas office party.
"Nothing serious, just maybe three, four thousand years wherein these Focus on the Family nutballs and especially this hateful Dobson fellow shall receive only sporadic blessings and deferred prayer responses and will have to go all the way to the back of the line, behind Dick Cheney and Tim LaHaye and Mel Gibson, to await salvation."
"Hell, I still love them all. Even Dobson," the One added, flashing his trademark dazzling, compassionate grin. "I just don't like them very much."
When the news reached Focus on the Family's Colorado Springs headquarters, stunned members were seen running into walls and bashing their foreheads with large Bibles and ramming their Toyota Corollas and Ford pickups into each other and muttering incoherent lines from "Passion of the Christ" and popping Prozac like M&M's.
"Where are the Ken dolls! Someone get to the dungeon and make sure my Ken doll collection is safe!" screamed James Dobson himself, emerging from a secret room in a fuchsia leotard and launching into a bizarre rant no one could quite understand. Reporters seeking comment could only look at each other in stunned silence, wishing they could be in a bar somewhere.
In related news, the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, another right-wing, anti-gay Christian group that allegedly pressured Ford Motor Co. into yanking much of its advertising from upscale gay publications, has, apparently, accidentally banned itself.
"Someone who is no longer in the organization had the bright idea that we should ban any American company or group that supported the outright ignorance of Christ's true message," sighed AFA chairman Donald Wildmon, chugging from a large bottle of Red Bull and stroking the hairless cat in his lap and making a strange hissing noise with his tongue. "Hell, it sounded great at the 'Harry Potter' book-burning rally. But then again, most everyone was buzzed on spiked Kool-Aid and Kumbaya pie."
"Turns out, when all votes were counted, the group that most needed banning, besides the Catholic church and Dobson's clan, was us. Apparently, we have no real clue as to what Christ truly stood for. Who knew?"
Effective immediately, the AFA's ban on itself means its members will no longer be able support or endorse anything it says or does, until further notice from itself.
"It makes shopping, like, totally impossible," said Beth-Ann Binderbottom, mother of nine and AFA member for the past 17 years and devout watcher of "Touched by an Angel" and committed scourer of all live radio and TV programming for any trace of female nipples, curse words or Jessica Simpson's butt.
"Due to the ban on myself, I now I have to buy the exact opposite of everything I would normally buy," she lamented. "What the gosh-golly heck am I supposed to do with all these green vegetables, Tom Robbins books, bottles of wine and hot porn DVDs?"
Christ, who will be in negotiations with the lords of the underworld next week about what can be done about Jerry Falwell, summarized it this way: "Hell, at the root of it, we're all pagans," JC said with a wink, from a lovely pattern of bark on an old-growth sycamore in a heavily wooded forest somewhere in Bavaria.
Thoughts for the author? E-mail him.
Mark Morford's Notes & Errata column appears every Wednesday and Friday on SF Gate and in the Datebook section of the SF Chronicle. To get on the e-mail list for this column, please click here and remove one article of clothing. Mark's column also has an RSS feed and an archive of past columns, which includes a tiny photo of Mark probably insufficient for you to recognize him in the street and give him gifts.
As if that weren't enough, Mark also contributes to the hot, spankin' SF Gate Culture Blog.
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/12/09/notes120905.DTL
A Wild West Romance? A Film Highly touted pre-release
Blogger's Comment. Watch for review in coming weeks. A buzz for a Western film about homo-sexual, same sex LOVE directed by an Asian. Thank goodness for liberalism and cultural elitism. More about earlier works with Mr. Lee
http://www.salon.com/ent/int/1997/10/17lee.html
December 9, 2005
MOVIE REVIEW 'BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN'
Riding the High Country, Finding and Losing Love
By STEPHEN HOLDEN
THE lonesome chill that seeps through Ang Lee's epic western, "Brokeback Mountain," is as bone deep as the movie's heartbreaking story of two cowboys who fall in love almost by accident. It is embedded in the craggy landscape where their idyll begins and ends. It creeps into the farthest corners of the wide-open spaces they share with coyotes, bears and herds of sheep and rises like a stifled cry into the big, empty sky that stretches beyond the horizon.
One night, when their campfire dies, and the biting cold drives them to huddle together in a bedroll, a sudden spark between Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) flares into an undying flame.
The same mood of acute desolation permeates the spare, gnarly prose of Annie Proulx's short story, first published in The New Yorker in 1997, adapted by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana. Mr. McMurtry knows about loneliness. Its ache suffused his novel and his screenplay for "The Last Picture Show," made into a film 34 years ago by Peter Bogdanovich.
The sexual bouts between these two ranch hands who have never heard the term gay (in 1963, when the story begins, it was still a code word transiting into the mainstream) are described by Ms. Proulx as "quick, rough, laughing and snorting."
That's exactly how Mr. Lee films their first sexual grappling (discreetly) in the shadows of the cramped little tent. The next morning, Ennis mumbles, "I'm no queer." And Jack replies, "Me neither." Still, they do it again, and again, in the daylight as well as at night. Sometimes their pent-up passions explode in ferocious roughhouse that is indistinguishable from fighting.
This moving and majestic film would be a landmark if only because it is the first Hollywood movie to unmask the homoerotic strain in American culture that Leslie Fiedler discerned in his notorious 1948 Partisan Review essay, "Come Back to the Raft Ag'in, Huck Honey." Fiedler characterized the bond between Huckleberry Finn and Jim, a runaway slave, as an unconscious romantic attachment shared by two males of different races as they flee the more constraining and civilizing domain of women. He went on to identify that bond as a recurrent theme in American literature.
In popular culture, Fiedler's Freudianism certainly could be applied to the Lone Ranger and Tonto. Minus the ethnic division, it might also be widened to include a long line of westerns and buddy movies, from "Red River" to "Midnight Cowboy" to "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid": the pure male bonding that dare not explore its shadow side.
Ennis and Jack's 20-year romance begins when they are hired in the summer of 1963 by Joe Aguirre (Randy Quaid), a hard-boiled rancher, to work as sheepherders on Brokeback Mountain in the Wyoming high country. (The movie was filmed in Alberta, in the Canadian Rockies.) Subsisting mostly on canned beans and whiskey, the two cowboys develop a boozy friendship by the campfire.
So taciturn and bottled up that he swallows his syllables as he pulls words out of his mouth in gruff, reluctant grunts, Ennis tells Jack of being raised by a brother and sister after his parents died in a car crash; Jack, brought up in the rodeo, is more talkative and recalls his lifelong alienation from his father, a bull rider.
When signs of an early blizzard cut short their summer employment, Ennis and Jack go their separate ways; Ennis's farewell is a simple "See you around." Both, though, are torn up. Ennis marries his girlfriend, Alma (Michelle Williams), and they have two daughters. Jack meets and marries Lureen (Anne Hathaway), a Texan rodeo queen, with whom he has a son, and joins her father's farm-equipment business.
Four years pass before Jack, who is living in Texas, sends a general-delivery postcard to Ennis, who has settled in Wyoming, saying he will be in the area and would like to visit. The instant they set eyes on each other, their suspended passion erupts into a spontaneous clinch. Alma sees it all, and her face, from that moment on, remains frozen in misery.
The reunited lovers rush to a motel.
So begins a sporadic and tormented affair in which the two meet once or twice a year for fishing trips on which no fish are caught. Jack urges that they forsake their marriages and set up a ranch together. But Ennis, haunted by a childhood memory of his father taking him to see the mutilated body of a rancher, tortured and beaten to death with a tire iron for living with another man, is immobilized by fear and shame.
Both Mr. Ledger and Mr. Gyllenhaal make this anguished love story physically palpable. Mr. Ledger magically and mysteriously disappears beneath the skin of his lean, sinewy character. It is a great screen performance, as good as the best of Marlon Brando and Sean Penn. The pain and disappointment felt by Jack, who is softer, more self-aware and self-accepting, continually registers in Mr. Gyllenhaal's sad, expectant silver-dollar eyes.
The second half of the movie opens up Ms. Proulx's story to follow both men's slowly crumbling marriages. For years, Alma chokes on her pain until one day, after she and Ennis have divorced, it rises up as if she were strangling on her own bile. As Jack, desperately frustrated, has clandestine encounters with other men, Ms. Hathaway's Lureen slowly calcifies into a clenched robotic shell of her peppery younger self.
"Brokeback Mountain" is not quite the period piece that some would like to imagine. America's squeaky closet doors may have swung open far enough for a gay rodeo circuit to flourish. But let's not kid ourselves. In large segments of American society, especially in sports and the military, those doors remain sealed. The murder of Matthew Shepard, after all, took place in "Brokeback" territory. Another recent film, "Jarhead" (in which Mr. Gyllenhaal plays a marine), suggests how any kind of male behavior perceived as soft and feminine within certain closed male environments triggers abuse and violence and how that repression of sexual energy is directly channeled into warfare.
Yet "Brokeback Mountain" is ultimately not about sex (there is very little of it in the film) but about love: love stumbled into, love thwarted, love held sorrowfully in the heart.
Or, as Ms. Proulx writes, "What Jack remembered and craved in a way he could neither help nor understand was the time that distant summer on Brokeback when Ennis had come up behind him and pulled him close, the silent embrace satisfying some shared and sexless hunger."
One tender moment's reprieve from loneliness can illuminate a life.
"Brokeback Mountain" is rated R. It has mild violence and sexual situations.
Brokeback Mountain
Opens today in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Directed by Ang Lee; written by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, based on the short story by Annie Proulx; director of photography, Rodrigo Prieto; edited by Geraldine Peroni and Dylan Tichenor; music by Gustavo Santaolalla; production designer, Judy Becker; produced by Ms. Ossana and James Schamus; released by Focus Features. Running time: 134 minutes.
WITH: Heath Ledger (Ennis Del Mar), Jake Gyllenhaal (Jack Twist), Linda Cardellini (Cassie), Anna Faris (Lashawn Malone), Anne Hathaway (Lureen Newsome), Michelle Williams (Alma), Randy Quaid (Joe Aguirre) and Kate Mara (Alma Jr.).
http://www.salon.com/ent/int/1997/10/17lee.html
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
December 9, 2005
MOVIE REVIEW 'BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN'
Riding the High Country, Finding and Losing Love
By STEPHEN HOLDEN
THE lonesome chill that seeps through Ang Lee's epic western, "Brokeback Mountain," is as bone deep as the movie's heartbreaking story of two cowboys who fall in love almost by accident. It is embedded in the craggy landscape where their idyll begins and ends. It creeps into the farthest corners of the wide-open spaces they share with coyotes, bears and herds of sheep and rises like a stifled cry into the big, empty sky that stretches beyond the horizon.
One night, when their campfire dies, and the biting cold drives them to huddle together in a bedroll, a sudden spark between Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) flares into an undying flame.
The same mood of acute desolation permeates the spare, gnarly prose of Annie Proulx's short story, first published in The New Yorker in 1997, adapted by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana. Mr. McMurtry knows about loneliness. Its ache suffused his novel and his screenplay for "The Last Picture Show," made into a film 34 years ago by Peter Bogdanovich.
The sexual bouts between these two ranch hands who have never heard the term gay (in 1963, when the story begins, it was still a code word transiting into the mainstream) are described by Ms. Proulx as "quick, rough, laughing and snorting."
That's exactly how Mr. Lee films their first sexual grappling (discreetly) in the shadows of the cramped little tent. The next morning, Ennis mumbles, "I'm no queer." And Jack replies, "Me neither." Still, they do it again, and again, in the daylight as well as at night. Sometimes their pent-up passions explode in ferocious roughhouse that is indistinguishable from fighting.
This moving and majestic film would be a landmark if only because it is the first Hollywood movie to unmask the homoerotic strain in American culture that Leslie Fiedler discerned in his notorious 1948 Partisan Review essay, "Come Back to the Raft Ag'in, Huck Honey." Fiedler characterized the bond between Huckleberry Finn and Jim, a runaway slave, as an unconscious romantic attachment shared by two males of different races as they flee the more constraining and civilizing domain of women. He went on to identify that bond as a recurrent theme in American literature.
In popular culture, Fiedler's Freudianism certainly could be applied to the Lone Ranger and Tonto. Minus the ethnic division, it might also be widened to include a long line of westerns and buddy movies, from "Red River" to "Midnight Cowboy" to "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid": the pure male bonding that dare not explore its shadow side.
Ennis and Jack's 20-year romance begins when they are hired in the summer of 1963 by Joe Aguirre (Randy Quaid), a hard-boiled rancher, to work as sheepherders on Brokeback Mountain in the Wyoming high country. (The movie was filmed in Alberta, in the Canadian Rockies.) Subsisting mostly on canned beans and whiskey, the two cowboys develop a boozy friendship by the campfire.
So taciturn and bottled up that he swallows his syllables as he pulls words out of his mouth in gruff, reluctant grunts, Ennis tells Jack of being raised by a brother and sister after his parents died in a car crash; Jack, brought up in the rodeo, is more talkative and recalls his lifelong alienation from his father, a bull rider.
When signs of an early blizzard cut short their summer employment, Ennis and Jack go their separate ways; Ennis's farewell is a simple "See you around." Both, though, are torn up. Ennis marries his girlfriend, Alma (Michelle Williams), and they have two daughters. Jack meets and marries Lureen (Anne Hathaway), a Texan rodeo queen, with whom he has a son, and joins her father's farm-equipment business.
Four years pass before Jack, who is living in Texas, sends a general-delivery postcard to Ennis, who has settled in Wyoming, saying he will be in the area and would like to visit. The instant they set eyes on each other, their suspended passion erupts into a spontaneous clinch. Alma sees it all, and her face, from that moment on, remains frozen in misery.
The reunited lovers rush to a motel.
So begins a sporadic and tormented affair in which the two meet once or twice a year for fishing trips on which no fish are caught. Jack urges that they forsake their marriages and set up a ranch together. But Ennis, haunted by a childhood memory of his father taking him to see the mutilated body of a rancher, tortured and beaten to death with a tire iron for living with another man, is immobilized by fear and shame.
Both Mr. Ledger and Mr. Gyllenhaal make this anguished love story physically palpable. Mr. Ledger magically and mysteriously disappears beneath the skin of his lean, sinewy character. It is a great screen performance, as good as the best of Marlon Brando and Sean Penn. The pain and disappointment felt by Jack, who is softer, more self-aware and self-accepting, continually registers in Mr. Gyllenhaal's sad, expectant silver-dollar eyes.
The second half of the movie opens up Ms. Proulx's story to follow both men's slowly crumbling marriages. For years, Alma chokes on her pain until one day, after she and Ennis have divorced, it rises up as if she were strangling on her own bile. As Jack, desperately frustrated, has clandestine encounters with other men, Ms. Hathaway's Lureen slowly calcifies into a clenched robotic shell of her peppery younger self.
"Brokeback Mountain" is not quite the period piece that some would like to imagine. America's squeaky closet doors may have swung open far enough for a gay rodeo circuit to flourish. But let's not kid ourselves. In large segments of American society, especially in sports and the military, those doors remain sealed. The murder of Matthew Shepard, after all, took place in "Brokeback" territory. Another recent film, "Jarhead" (in which Mr. Gyllenhaal plays a marine), suggests how any kind of male behavior perceived as soft and feminine within certain closed male environments triggers abuse and violence and how that repression of sexual energy is directly channeled into warfare.
Yet "Brokeback Mountain" is ultimately not about sex (there is very little of it in the film) but about love: love stumbled into, love thwarted, love held sorrowfully in the heart.
Or, as Ms. Proulx writes, "What Jack remembered and craved in a way he could neither help nor understand was the time that distant summer on Brokeback when Ennis had come up behind him and pulled him close, the silent embrace satisfying some shared and sexless hunger."
One tender moment's reprieve from loneliness can illuminate a life.
"Brokeback Mountain" is rated R. It has mild violence and sexual situations.
Brokeback Mountain
Opens today in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Directed by Ang Lee; written by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, based on the short story by Annie Proulx; director of photography, Rodrigo Prieto; edited by Geraldine Peroni and Dylan Tichenor; music by Gustavo Santaolalla; production designer, Judy Becker; produced by Ms. Ossana and James Schamus; released by Focus Features. Running time: 134 minutes.
WITH: Heath Ledger (Ennis Del Mar), Jake Gyllenhaal (Jack Twist), Linda Cardellini (Cassie), Anna Faris (Lashawn Malone), Anne Hathaway (Lureen Newsome), Michelle Williams (Alma), Randy Quaid (Joe Aguirre) and Kate Mara (Alma Jr.).
Thursday, December 08, 2005
A review of Alito's writing -A very conservative Judge
Review of Alito's opinions finds clear pattern
By Stephen Henderson and Howard Mintz
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON (KRT) - During his 15 years on the federal bench, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito has worked quietly but resolutely to weave a conservative legal agenda into the fabric of the nation's laws.
A Knight Ridder review of Alito's 311 published opinions on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals - each of singular legal or public policy importance - found a clear pattern. Although Alito's opinions are rarely written with obvious ideology, he's seldom sided with a criminal defendant, a foreign national facing deportation, an employee alleging discrimination or consumers suing big businesses.
Despite the intense focus on whether Alito would cast the decisive vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, he has had scant opportunity as a judge to address the issue. As a young lawyer in the Reagan administration in 1985, he did advocate overturning the landmark abortion ruling. But it's his record in matters that routinely come before the Supreme Court that suggests he's likely to be more reliably conservative than Sandra Day O'Connor, the justice he would replace.
Liberal and conservative supporters alike describe the quiet, scholarly Alito as a restrained judge who follows the law, not his personal beliefs. Those who've worked closely with him, including former law clerks and fellow judges, say they can't think of a case in which he took a partisan political stance.
"As you can probably glean from his opinions, he's a conservative," said former 3rd Circuit Judge Timothy Lewis, a more liberal judge who served with Alito from 1992 to 2000 and supports the nomination. "I'm very comfortable with his judicial philosophy, though it was very different than mine. It only works if the judge doesn't have an agenda. He is not result-oriented."
Alito's voluminous judicial record, however, puts him among the nation's most conservative judges.
"Alito is more conservative than O'Connor; this isn't a hard question," said Rory Little, a Hastings College of the Law professor in San Francisco and a former Supreme Court clerk who praised Alito's credentials. "This isn't a guy who is going to vote in a way that will make anybody on the left happy."
A review of Alito's work on dozens of cases that raised important social issues found that he rarely supports individual rights claims.
The primary exception has been his opinions about First Amendment protections. Alito has been a near free-speech absolutist in his writings, and he's been equally strong on protecting religious freedoms.
But even some of his First Amendment opinions underscore the bent in the rest of his work. He hasn't strictly enforced church-state separation, and his love of the First Amendment seems to stop at the prison walls. He has written opinions that would deny prisoners access to reading materials and curtail their rights to practice their religious beliefs.
In other areas, Alito often goes out of his way to narrow the scope of individual rights, sometimes reaching out to undo lower-court rulings that affirmed those rights.
In one notable ruling, Alito snatched a lower-court victory from a group of diabetic inmates who alleged their jailers didn't adequately treat their illness.
Alito has been particularly rigid in employment discrimination cases.
Many conservative jurists set a high bar for plaintiffs who allege racial, gender or age bias in the workplace, but Alito has seldom found merit in a bias claim.
He has written in at least 18 discrimination cases and has sided with plaintiffs four times, including once when white police officers claimed that Pittsburgh's affirmative action policy unfairly disadvantaged them and another time when a mentally disabled grocery store worker was fired.
Alito also sided with a disabled New Jersey police dispatcher and once with a female employee who said she'd been sexually harassed but couldn't show that she'd suffered monetary loss as a result.
Like his opinions in other areas, Alito's work in discrimination cases is nearly devoid of explosive language or dismissive tones. His arguments have been convincing to his colleagues: Thirteen of his rulings were for the 3rd Circuit majority, meaning that at least one other judge on the court agreed with him.
But in most of the employment discrimination cases, Alito succeeded in applying a standard higher than the Supreme Court requires to plaintiffs' claims, often forcing them to prove that bias was the motivation behind their misfortunes.
In two cases, Alito dissented from 3rd Circuit rulings that allowed discrimination claims to proceed. In one, a racial discrimination case involving a black hotel maid, Alito agreed that the woman had been treated unfairly, but he said that the employer had produced enough evidence to show that the unfair treatment didn't amount to illegal discrimination.
In the second case, a gender discrimination claim, Alito accused the majority of making it too easy for the plaintiffs to get to trial.
Alito's other opinions on discrimination reveal similar skepticism. He has written consistently that plaintiffs failed to prove that bias was the "determinative" factor in their misfortunes and that the courts should resist subjecting employers to second-guessing about routine personnel matters.
In one case, Clowes v. Allegheny Valley Hospital, he overruled a jury verdict in favor of a nurse who claimed age discrimination. Janet Clowes, a nurse who'd worked at the hospital for 30 years, alleged that her employer's harassment effectively forced her to quit her job, called constructive discharge.
Alito's decision to overturn the jury verdict was an aggressive move, seemingly at odds with his usual restraint.
"We recognize that the jury ... presumably concluded ... that (the supervisor) treated Clowes unfairly," Alito wrote. "But it is clear that unfair treatment is by no means the same as constructive discharge."
Alito's record also suggests that the former New Jersey U.S. attorney seldom strays far from his prosecutorial roots and remains reluctant to side with criminal defendants. His tough views on crime and punishment are likely to cement the Supreme Court's rightward movement in that area, particularly when it comes to evaluating the complex federal sentencing laws and the ongoing efforts by Congress to write new criminal laws.
In 60 criminal appeals that resulted in published decisions in which he wrote a majority, dissenting or concurring opinion, Alito sided with a defendant's key argument in 12 cases, most of the time sending a case back to a lower court judge for a new sentencing hearing.
Alito voted to overturn two convictions in those cases, excluding appeals where he left a central conviction intact but set aside other offenses.
But from police searches to the death penalty, Alito has rarely been persuaded to overturn a conviction or sentence.
His view of habeas corpus rights - the chief legal window through which a death row inmate seeks a reprieve - has been particularly restrictive. Because the death penalty is one of the high court's most active areas of criminal review and because O'Connor has been the swing vote in many capital cases, Alito's confirmation could mean a dramatic change.
Alito has taken part in at least 10 cases involving death row inmates since 1991, and he's sided with the defendants in two and allowed a third capital case to proceed in federal court without taking a position on the merits. That puts him among the 3rd Circuit's most conservative jurists when it comes to the death penalty.
Former 3rd Circuit Chief Judge Edward Becker, appointed by President Reagan, has sided with death row inmates eight times in as many cases in the same period.
In one death row case, the Supreme Court ruled that Alito was wrong. Ronald Rompilla, a Pennsylvania death row inmate, would have been executed this year under Alito's reasoning. But the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling this June authored by O'Connor, found that Rompilla received such dreadful representation at his 1988 trial that his death sentence should be overturned, a rebuke to Alito's view that his lawyer did enough to protect his rights.
The death penalty case that appears to best illustrate Alito's stance came in 2001, when a splintered 3rd Circuit overturned the death sentence of James William Riley, who was on Delaware's death row for the 1982 murder of a liquor store owner.
The majority expressed deep concerns about racial bias in the selection of Riley's jury, citing the fact that prosecutors dismissed all three prospective black jurors. Defense lawyers also produced evidence that no black juror had sat on any Dover capital case during the time when Riley, who is black, was on trial.
"One of the principal objections to the operation of the death penalty in this country is that it is applied unevenly, particularly against black defendants," wrote 3rd Circuit Judge Dolores Sloviter, one of the court's more liberal judges.
Alito was unmoved. He argued that much more than legal worry is required to justify overturning the findings of a state court, particularly in a death penalty case.
"Reviewing habeas decisions in capital cases is one of the most important and difficult responsibilities of this court," he wrote. "Our role is vital - but limited - and is not to be confused with that of the jury or the various branches of state government."
Alito called the majority's finding "simplistic" and added that it treated the challenge of the jurors as "if they had no relevant characteristics other than race, as if they were in effect black and white marbles in a jar from which lawyers drew."
To supporters and detractors, that was vintage Alito. He demands clear proof that something is awry, not just inference - and the burden of proof is high.
He wrote a majority decision this year ordering a new murder trial for defendant Curtis Brinson - but only after the record showed that a Philadelphia prosecutor had dismissed 13 of 14 prospective black jurors, then showed up in a training videotape explaining ways to keep black jurors off criminal trials.
"It shows a very consistent conservative record of deferring to either the state courts or deferring to police and prosecutors in criminal cases," said David Rudovsky, a University of Pennsylvania law professor who argued numerous criminal cases before Alito. "It seems that unless the error is very egregious, he won't step in."
Alito's deference to law enforcement is most evident when he has addressed allegations that police and prosecutors overstepped their constitutional bounds.
The judge's supporters insist that he won't rubber-stamp law enforcement's conduct. In his 1998 decision in the case of Jesse Kithcart, who was convicted of federal gun charges, for example, Alito sided with the defendant's core argument.
Alito found that Kithcart's conviction had been tainted by an unconstitutional police search. Evidence showed that police searching for a robber stopped Kithcart only because he was the first black they saw driving a sports car after they were alerted to look for "two black males in a black sports car."
"The mere fact Kithcart is black and the perpetrators had been described as two black males is plainly insufficient," Alito wrote.
Still, Alito's record shows a strong deference to police authority.
In a decision last year, he endorsed an 18-month FBI undercover probe that included audio and video monitoring of boxing promoter Robert W. Lee Sr.'s hotel suite, done without a federal judge's approval. Lee, a founder of the International Boxing Federation, was convicted of money laundering and tax evasion.
Although Alito found that the surveillance didn't violate Lee's privacy rights, a colleague dissented, saying: "The limitations of that Orwellian capability were not subject to any court order."
In one highly publicized case, Alito upheld a police strip search of a 10-year-old girl by arguing that a warrant that didn't mention the girl should be read "broadly." The ruling is a rare instance of a conservative jurist arguing for a departure from strict textual interpretation in favor of government intrusion.
And in another 1995 case, Alito dissented from two colleagues who found that a family's lawsuit over a 1990 drug raid could proceed. Inez Baker and her two teenage sons were forced to the ground at gunpoint and handcuffed as they arrived at another son's house for dinner.
Although Alito is the son of Italian immigrants, his record in immigration cases is similar to his perspective in criminal cases. He's demonstrated an inclination to defer to the judgment of the immigration courts, which are under the Justice Department's umbrella. As a result, a non-citizen fighting deportation is paddling upstream with Alito.
Legal scholars, and some of Alito's supporters, have pointed to his decision in the case of Parastoo Fatin, a young Iranian woman who was fighting deportation in the early 1990s, as evidence of his scholarship and his impact on immigration law. Alito ruled in Fatin's case that gender-based persecution could be grounds for asylum.
But the ruling was a hollow victory for Fatin. She lost her case when Alito found that she hadn't shown enough factual evidence to prove that she'd be persecuted if she were sent back to Iran. It was typical Alito - an impeccably crafted decision that denied relief to an individual.
"I'm not optimistic," said Lawrence Rudnick, a Philadelphia immigration lawyer who represented Fatin. "He's certainly not going to be good for immigrants' rights."
Alito has sided with non-citizens in seven of his 24 published rulings involving matters such as life-or-death bids for asylum. And when Alito has sided with an immigrant, it's often been on narrow grounds. Two instances involved Chinese women who produced evidence that they'd been targets of China's forced abortion policy, established grounds for asylum that are especially congenial to social conservatives.
In a third case, Alito found that Annagret Goetze, a German national, shouldn't be deported because she qualified as a religious worker for a Pennsylvania nonprofit committed to "Christianizing the ordinary aspects of life for the mentally handicapped."
Alito's deference to the Board of Immigration Appeals, the last word in the immigration system, will take on heightened importance if he joins the Supreme Court, which is likely to consider important new developments in immigration law.
Alito was part of a major 3rd Circuit decision two years ago that upheld the Bush administration's streamlining of the Board of Immigration Appeals. But his ruling was another stark reminder of his strict view of asylum claims. The majority overturned a perfunctory Board of Immigration Appeals decision to reject the asylum bid of Saidon Dia, who presented evidence that Guinean police were hunting for him and that political enemies had burned his house to the ground and raped his wife.
Alito dissented. While conceding that such cases are "among the most difficult we face," Alito found Dia hadn't produced enough proof to second-guess the immigration system.
"In cases where people are requesting asylum based on politics or a particular social group, he's very strict," said David Leopold, an Ohio immigration lawyer who's examined Alito's record for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "Is someone fleeing forced abortion more deserving of protection than someone fleeing political persecution?"
Knight Ridder researcher Tish Wells contributed to this report.
By Stephen Henderson and Howard Mintz
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON (KRT) - During his 15 years on the federal bench, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito has worked quietly but resolutely to weave a conservative legal agenda into the fabric of the nation's laws.
A Knight Ridder review of Alito's 311 published opinions on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals - each of singular legal or public policy importance - found a clear pattern. Although Alito's opinions are rarely written with obvious ideology, he's seldom sided with a criminal defendant, a foreign national facing deportation, an employee alleging discrimination or consumers suing big businesses.
Despite the intense focus on whether Alito would cast the decisive vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, he has had scant opportunity as a judge to address the issue. As a young lawyer in the Reagan administration in 1985, he did advocate overturning the landmark abortion ruling. But it's his record in matters that routinely come before the Supreme Court that suggests he's likely to be more reliably conservative than Sandra Day O'Connor, the justice he would replace.
Liberal and conservative supporters alike describe the quiet, scholarly Alito as a restrained judge who follows the law, not his personal beliefs. Those who've worked closely with him, including former law clerks and fellow judges, say they can't think of a case in which he took a partisan political stance.
"As you can probably glean from his opinions, he's a conservative," said former 3rd Circuit Judge Timothy Lewis, a more liberal judge who served with Alito from 1992 to 2000 and supports the nomination. "I'm very comfortable with his judicial philosophy, though it was very different than mine. It only works if the judge doesn't have an agenda. He is not result-oriented."
Alito's voluminous judicial record, however, puts him among the nation's most conservative judges.
"Alito is more conservative than O'Connor; this isn't a hard question," said Rory Little, a Hastings College of the Law professor in San Francisco and a former Supreme Court clerk who praised Alito's credentials. "This isn't a guy who is going to vote in a way that will make anybody on the left happy."
A review of Alito's work on dozens of cases that raised important social issues found that he rarely supports individual rights claims.
The primary exception has been his opinions about First Amendment protections. Alito has been a near free-speech absolutist in his writings, and he's been equally strong on protecting religious freedoms.
But even some of his First Amendment opinions underscore the bent in the rest of his work. He hasn't strictly enforced church-state separation, and his love of the First Amendment seems to stop at the prison walls. He has written opinions that would deny prisoners access to reading materials and curtail their rights to practice their religious beliefs.
In other areas, Alito often goes out of his way to narrow the scope of individual rights, sometimes reaching out to undo lower-court rulings that affirmed those rights.
In one notable ruling, Alito snatched a lower-court victory from a group of diabetic inmates who alleged their jailers didn't adequately treat their illness.
Alito has been particularly rigid in employment discrimination cases.
Many conservative jurists set a high bar for plaintiffs who allege racial, gender or age bias in the workplace, but Alito has seldom found merit in a bias claim.
He has written in at least 18 discrimination cases and has sided with plaintiffs four times, including once when white police officers claimed that Pittsburgh's affirmative action policy unfairly disadvantaged them and another time when a mentally disabled grocery store worker was fired.
Alito also sided with a disabled New Jersey police dispatcher and once with a female employee who said she'd been sexually harassed but couldn't show that she'd suffered monetary loss as a result.
Like his opinions in other areas, Alito's work in discrimination cases is nearly devoid of explosive language or dismissive tones. His arguments have been convincing to his colleagues: Thirteen of his rulings were for the 3rd Circuit majority, meaning that at least one other judge on the court agreed with him.
But in most of the employment discrimination cases, Alito succeeded in applying a standard higher than the Supreme Court requires to plaintiffs' claims, often forcing them to prove that bias was the motivation behind their misfortunes.
In two cases, Alito dissented from 3rd Circuit rulings that allowed discrimination claims to proceed. In one, a racial discrimination case involving a black hotel maid, Alito agreed that the woman had been treated unfairly, but he said that the employer had produced enough evidence to show that the unfair treatment didn't amount to illegal discrimination.
In the second case, a gender discrimination claim, Alito accused the majority of making it too easy for the plaintiffs to get to trial.
Alito's other opinions on discrimination reveal similar skepticism. He has written consistently that plaintiffs failed to prove that bias was the "determinative" factor in their misfortunes and that the courts should resist subjecting employers to second-guessing about routine personnel matters.
In one case, Clowes v. Allegheny Valley Hospital, he overruled a jury verdict in favor of a nurse who claimed age discrimination. Janet Clowes, a nurse who'd worked at the hospital for 30 years, alleged that her employer's harassment effectively forced her to quit her job, called constructive discharge.
Alito's decision to overturn the jury verdict was an aggressive move, seemingly at odds with his usual restraint.
"We recognize that the jury ... presumably concluded ... that (the supervisor) treated Clowes unfairly," Alito wrote. "But it is clear that unfair treatment is by no means the same as constructive discharge."
Alito's record also suggests that the former New Jersey U.S. attorney seldom strays far from his prosecutorial roots and remains reluctant to side with criminal defendants. His tough views on crime and punishment are likely to cement the Supreme Court's rightward movement in that area, particularly when it comes to evaluating the complex federal sentencing laws and the ongoing efforts by Congress to write new criminal laws.
In 60 criminal appeals that resulted in published decisions in which he wrote a majority, dissenting or concurring opinion, Alito sided with a defendant's key argument in 12 cases, most of the time sending a case back to a lower court judge for a new sentencing hearing.
Alito voted to overturn two convictions in those cases, excluding appeals where he left a central conviction intact but set aside other offenses.
But from police searches to the death penalty, Alito has rarely been persuaded to overturn a conviction or sentence.
His view of habeas corpus rights - the chief legal window through which a death row inmate seeks a reprieve - has been particularly restrictive. Because the death penalty is one of the high court's most active areas of criminal review and because O'Connor has been the swing vote in many capital cases, Alito's confirmation could mean a dramatic change.
Alito has taken part in at least 10 cases involving death row inmates since 1991, and he's sided with the defendants in two and allowed a third capital case to proceed in federal court without taking a position on the merits. That puts him among the 3rd Circuit's most conservative jurists when it comes to the death penalty.
Former 3rd Circuit Chief Judge Edward Becker, appointed by President Reagan, has sided with death row inmates eight times in as many cases in the same period.
In one death row case, the Supreme Court ruled that Alito was wrong. Ronald Rompilla, a Pennsylvania death row inmate, would have been executed this year under Alito's reasoning. But the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling this June authored by O'Connor, found that Rompilla received such dreadful representation at his 1988 trial that his death sentence should be overturned, a rebuke to Alito's view that his lawyer did enough to protect his rights.
The death penalty case that appears to best illustrate Alito's stance came in 2001, when a splintered 3rd Circuit overturned the death sentence of James William Riley, who was on Delaware's death row for the 1982 murder of a liquor store owner.
The majority expressed deep concerns about racial bias in the selection of Riley's jury, citing the fact that prosecutors dismissed all three prospective black jurors. Defense lawyers also produced evidence that no black juror had sat on any Dover capital case during the time when Riley, who is black, was on trial.
"One of the principal objections to the operation of the death penalty in this country is that it is applied unevenly, particularly against black defendants," wrote 3rd Circuit Judge Dolores Sloviter, one of the court's more liberal judges.
Alito was unmoved. He argued that much more than legal worry is required to justify overturning the findings of a state court, particularly in a death penalty case.
"Reviewing habeas decisions in capital cases is one of the most important and difficult responsibilities of this court," he wrote. "Our role is vital - but limited - and is not to be confused with that of the jury or the various branches of state government."
Alito called the majority's finding "simplistic" and added that it treated the challenge of the jurors as "if they had no relevant characteristics other than race, as if they were in effect black and white marbles in a jar from which lawyers drew."
To supporters and detractors, that was vintage Alito. He demands clear proof that something is awry, not just inference - and the burden of proof is high.
He wrote a majority decision this year ordering a new murder trial for defendant Curtis Brinson - but only after the record showed that a Philadelphia prosecutor had dismissed 13 of 14 prospective black jurors, then showed up in a training videotape explaining ways to keep black jurors off criminal trials.
"It shows a very consistent conservative record of deferring to either the state courts or deferring to police and prosecutors in criminal cases," said David Rudovsky, a University of Pennsylvania law professor who argued numerous criminal cases before Alito. "It seems that unless the error is very egregious, he won't step in."
Alito's deference to law enforcement is most evident when he has addressed allegations that police and prosecutors overstepped their constitutional bounds.
The judge's supporters insist that he won't rubber-stamp law enforcement's conduct. In his 1998 decision in the case of Jesse Kithcart, who was convicted of federal gun charges, for example, Alito sided with the defendant's core argument.
Alito found that Kithcart's conviction had been tainted by an unconstitutional police search. Evidence showed that police searching for a robber stopped Kithcart only because he was the first black they saw driving a sports car after they were alerted to look for "two black males in a black sports car."
"The mere fact Kithcart is black and the perpetrators had been described as two black males is plainly insufficient," Alito wrote.
Still, Alito's record shows a strong deference to police authority.
In a decision last year, he endorsed an 18-month FBI undercover probe that included audio and video monitoring of boxing promoter Robert W. Lee Sr.'s hotel suite, done without a federal judge's approval. Lee, a founder of the International Boxing Federation, was convicted of money laundering and tax evasion.
Although Alito found that the surveillance didn't violate Lee's privacy rights, a colleague dissented, saying: "The limitations of that Orwellian capability were not subject to any court order."
In one highly publicized case, Alito upheld a police strip search of a 10-year-old girl by arguing that a warrant that didn't mention the girl should be read "broadly." The ruling is a rare instance of a conservative jurist arguing for a departure from strict textual interpretation in favor of government intrusion.
And in another 1995 case, Alito dissented from two colleagues who found that a family's lawsuit over a 1990 drug raid could proceed. Inez Baker and her two teenage sons were forced to the ground at gunpoint and handcuffed as they arrived at another son's house for dinner.
Although Alito is the son of Italian immigrants, his record in immigration cases is similar to his perspective in criminal cases. He's demonstrated an inclination to defer to the judgment of the immigration courts, which are under the Justice Department's umbrella. As a result, a non-citizen fighting deportation is paddling upstream with Alito.
Legal scholars, and some of Alito's supporters, have pointed to his decision in the case of Parastoo Fatin, a young Iranian woman who was fighting deportation in the early 1990s, as evidence of his scholarship and his impact on immigration law. Alito ruled in Fatin's case that gender-based persecution could be grounds for asylum.
But the ruling was a hollow victory for Fatin. She lost her case when Alito found that she hadn't shown enough factual evidence to prove that she'd be persecuted if she were sent back to Iran. It was typical Alito - an impeccably crafted decision that denied relief to an individual.
"I'm not optimistic," said Lawrence Rudnick, a Philadelphia immigration lawyer who represented Fatin. "He's certainly not going to be good for immigrants' rights."
Alito has sided with non-citizens in seven of his 24 published rulings involving matters such as life-or-death bids for asylum. And when Alito has sided with an immigrant, it's often been on narrow grounds. Two instances involved Chinese women who produced evidence that they'd been targets of China's forced abortion policy, established grounds for asylum that are especially congenial to social conservatives.
In a third case, Alito found that Annagret Goetze, a German national, shouldn't be deported because she qualified as a religious worker for a Pennsylvania nonprofit committed to "Christianizing the ordinary aspects of life for the mentally handicapped."
Alito's deference to the Board of Immigration Appeals, the last word in the immigration system, will take on heightened importance if he joins the Supreme Court, which is likely to consider important new developments in immigration law.
Alito was part of a major 3rd Circuit decision two years ago that upheld the Bush administration's streamlining of the Board of Immigration Appeals. But his ruling was another stark reminder of his strict view of asylum claims. The majority overturned a perfunctory Board of Immigration Appeals decision to reject the asylum bid of Saidon Dia, who presented evidence that Guinean police were hunting for him and that political enemies had burned his house to the ground and raped his wife.
Alito dissented. While conceding that such cases are "among the most difficult we face," Alito found Dia hadn't produced enough proof to second-guess the immigration system.
"In cases where people are requesting asylum based on politics or a particular social group, he's very strict," said David Leopold, an Ohio immigration lawyer who's examined Alito's record for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "Is someone fleeing forced abortion more deserving of protection than someone fleeing political persecution?"
Knight Ridder researcher Tish Wells contributed to this report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)