A Quick Tour of the 'Sphere Reveals...

So. The wind has subsided a bit, and it’s turned cold. When I say “subsided,” I mean: “Wind: From N at 24 mph, gusting to 29 mph.” (from the WX Channel web site) The current temp is 45, with a wind chill of 36. I just might defer the mini-Grand Tour one more day; it’s not at all pleasant outside right now and it’s supposed to be warmer tomorrow.

I know I’ve intimated I was going to get off politics for a while, but I just can’t help myself. Because there are a few articles in the media today that are just too, too good to pass up (and not pass along). First of all, there’s this in The New Republic (free registration required):

In one of her first important acts since Democrats recaptured Congress, Nancy Pelosi is about to make a decision that is both substantively foolish and politically tone-deaf. The decision involves the chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee. For obvious reasons, that post has serious implications for national security--as well as the image of a Democratic Party seeking to convince the public it can be trusted to govern. But it appears alarmingly likely that Pelosi will spurn both with a decision based on petty personal and identity politics.

The current ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee is Jane Harman of California. Harman is one of the most respected Democrats in the House on national security and intelligence issues--a widely acknowledged expert in a field that Democrats as a whole are woefully unfamiliar with. Given her current seniority on the committee, Harman is the natural choice to become its chair in the Democratic Congress--and she has made clear that she wants the job. But all indications are that Pelosi will deny Harman the job and appoint in her place Alcee Hastings of Florida, a former judge who was impeached on bribery charges--and someone who has left no discernable mark upon the critical intelligence debates of the post-September 11 era.

Ordinarily, few people would take Hastings seriously for such an important job. In 1981, Hastings was a federal judge in Miami. He was accused of conspiring with a friend to take a $150,000 bribe in exchange for issuing light sentences to a pair of mobsters. A Miami jury acquitted Hastings (while convicting the friend), but three different federal judicial panels later referred him to Congress for impeachment.

I’ve written about Hastings before. But I’m just a little bit surprised to see The New Republic, a moderate left-wing periodical, come out against Pelosi’s apparent choice for the chair of the House Intelligence committee. It just goes to show that there are a few reasonable Democrats that are more concerned with the national interest than partisan politics . (hat tip: Glenn, who has some great links on this subject, and more)

But, wait! There’s more! Let’s talk about Murtha, who Pelosi has endorsed for House Majority Leader.

Here’s Ruth Marcus, in an op-ed in the normally left-leaning WaPo:

If she gets her way and helps Murtha win a come-from-behind victory against Maryland's Steny Hoyer in tomorrow's leadership election, she's buying herself -- and the Democratic caucus -- endless news stories about Murtha's ethics. If, as he says, Hoyer has the votes, Pelosi has made herself look weak within the caucus -- not a smart move for any new leader, and certainly not for the first woman in the job. Perhaps the late timing and measured phrasing of Pelosi's endorsement were meant to ensure that it would have little impact. If so, Pelosi failed to recognize that once she weighed in, the vote for majority leader would inevitably be seen as a gauge of her clout.

Here’s an op-ed in the WSJ:

House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi's endorsement of Rep. John Murtha for majority leader, the No. 2 position in the Democratic leaderhsip, has roiled her caucus. "She will ensure that they [Mr. Murtha and his allies] win. This is hardball politics," Rep. Jim Moran, a top Murtha ally, told the Hill, a congressional newspaper. "We are entering an era where when the speaker instructs you what to do, you do it."

But several members are privately aghast that Mr. Murtha, a pork-barreling opponent of most House ethics reforms, could become the second most visible symbol of the new Democratic rule. "We are supposed to change business as usual, not put the fox in charge of the henhouse," one Democratic member told me. "It's not just the Abscam scandal of the 1980s that he barely dodged, he's a disaster waiting to happen because of his current behavior," another told me.

[…]

Melanie Sloan, the liberal head of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, was cheered on by Democrats six weeks ago when she helped reveal the Mark Foley scandal. Now she says that "Ms. Pelosi"s endorsement of Rep. Murtha, one of the most unethical members of Congress, show that she may have prioritized ethics reform merely to win votes with no real commitment to changing the culture of corruption."

Freakin’ Melanie Sloan! Remember her? When a former John Conyers staff member has issues with Murtha, you just know something’s rotten in Denmark the House. But…if you go to only one link in all this, read the WSJ op-ed. And wonder why Murtha remains in Congress, let alone how it came to pass he’s being considered for majority leader.

“Culture of corruption,” indeed.

Sad, sad, sad…from the San Francisco Chronicle:

After 90 years in San Francisco high schools, the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps must go, the San Francisco school board decided Tuesday night.

The Board of Education voted 4-2 to eliminate the popular program, phasing it out over two years.

Dozens of JROTC cadets at the board meeting burst into tears or covered their faces after the votes were cast.

"We're really shocked,'' said fourth-year Cadet Eric Chu, a senior at Lowell High School, his eyes filling with tears. "It provided me with a place to go."

Sometimes I wonder if SFO really is part of America, or something else entirely. I cannot begin to express how glad I am that I no longer live there.

Here’s a bit of good news, from The Beeb, no less:

Pakistan's national assembly has voted to amend the country's strict Sharia laws on rape and adultery.

Until now rape cases were dealt with in Sharia courts. Victims had to have four male witnesses to the crime - if not they faced prosecution for adultery.

Now civil courts will be able to try rape cases, assuming the upper house and the president ratify the move.

The reform has been seen as a test of President Musharraf's stated commitment to a moderate form of Islam.

"It is a historic bill because it will give rights to women and help end excesses against them," Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz told parliament after the vote.

Religious parties boycotted the vote, saying the bill encouraged "free sex".

A woman is raped every two hours and gang-raped every eight hours in Pakistan, according to the country's independent Human Rights Commission.

Maybe, just maybe, there’s some hope Islamic countries will emerge from the 7^th century and join the rest of the world. I’m not going to hold my breath, however.

And so it goes…