House of Hypocrisy, Part 3

The blog Facing South (http://www.southernstudies.org) has spotted yet another example of rank hypocrisy on the part of Congressional Republicans.

Facing South links to a Human Events post: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31121, which says:

Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and David Vitter (R-La.) will later this morning send a letter to Senate Banking Committee leaders demanding that they subpoena all records of bailed-out insurance giant AIG to find out how AIG executive bonuses were given unique and privileged treatment in the Obama stimulus bill. . . . . [the letter is] aimed at the Banking Committee Chairman, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) who authored the provision under which the AIG bonuses were exempted from the “stimulus” bill’s limits on executive compensation.

The New York Times reports that: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/business/20bailout.html?pagewanted=2&hp

Republicans have seized on possible shortcomings in bills passed to combat the crisis, noting that the Democrats control Congress . . . . Some Republicans have also been offering reminders that not one of them in the House voted for President Obama’s stimulus program.

But wait! As Facing South points out (via link to the Huffington Post), here's what the Republicans said just last month, in opposing any limits on executive compensation: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/06/gop-opposes-pay-limits-on_n_164544.html

President Obama has proposed capping compensation for executives at banks that take taxpayer bailout money at $500,000. Republicans hate the idea -- a position that puts them uncomfortably on the side of people currently about as popular as child-porn producers and subprime mortgage brokers.

Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) blamed the "tone deaf" bankers for creating the political environment that allows Obama to call for a cap.

"Because of their excesses, very bad things begin to happen, like the United States government telling a company what it can pay its employees. That's not a good thing in America," Kyl told the Huffington Post.

"What executives have done is troubling, but it's equally troubling to have government telling shareholders how much they can pay the executives," said Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL).

* * * *

The GOP is also concerned that setting compensation limits could put the country on the road to serfdom. "This is just a symptom of what happens when the government intervenes and we start controlling all aspects of the economy. This is just the first piece," said Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC). "If you accept the fact that the government should be setting pay scales in America, then it's hard not to go after these exorbitant salaries. But I think it's a sad day in America when the government starts setting pay, no matter how outlandish they are."

So, I suppose Senator DeMint was against limiting executive bonuses, before he was for them? Hmmmmm . . .

Another One Bites The Dust -- New Mexico Abolishes Capital Punishment

Kudos to New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who signed the bill repealing the state's death penalty late yesterday. Here's his statement:

Today marks the end of a long, personal journey for me and the issue of the death penalty. Throughout my adult life, I have been a firm believer in the death penalty as a just punishment – in very rare instances, and only for the most heinous crimes. I still believe that. But six years ago, when I took office as Governor of the State of New Mexico, I started to challenge my own thinking on the death penalty.

The issue became more real to me because I knew the day would come when one of two things might happen: I would either have to take action on legislation to repeal the death penalty, or more daunting, I might have to sign someone’s death warrant. I’ll be honest. The prospect of either decision was extremely troubling. But I was elected by the people of New Mexico to make just this type of decision.

So, like many of the supporters who took the time to meet with me this week, I have believed the death penalty can serve as a deterrent to some who might consider murdering a law enforcement officer, a corrections officer, a witness to a crime or kidnapping and murdering a child.

However, people continue to commit terrible crimes even in the face of the death penalty and responsible people on both sides of the debate disagree – strongly – on this issue. But what we cannot disagree on is the finality of this ultimate punishment. Once a conclusive decision has been made and executed, it cannot be reversed. And it is in consideration of this, that I have made my decision.

I have decided to sign legislation that repeals the death penalty in the state of New Mexico. Regardless of my personal opinion about the death penalty, I do not have confidence in the criminal justice system as it currently operates to be the final arbiter when it comes to who lives and who dies for their crime. If the State is going to undertake this awesome responsibility, the system to impose this ultimate penalty must be perfect and can never be wrong. But the reality is the system is not perfect – far from it. The system is inherently defective. DNA testing has proven that. Innocent people have been put on death row all across the country. Even with advances in DNA and other forensic evidence technologies, we can’t be 100-percent sure that only the truly guilty are convicted of capital crimes. Evidence, including DNA evidence, can be manipulated. Prosecutors can still abuse their powers. We cannot ensure competent defense counsel for all defendants. The sad truth is the wrong person can still be convicted in this day and age, and in cases where that conviction carries with it the ultimate sanction, we must have ultimate confidence – I would say certitude – that the system is without flaw or prejudice. Unfortunately, this is demonstrably not the case. And it bothers me greatly that minorities are overrepresented in the prison population and on death row.

I have to say that all of the law enforcement officers, and especially the parents and spouses of murder victims, made compelling arguments to keep the death penalty. I respect their opinions and have taken their experiences to heart -- which is why I struggled – even today – before making my final decision. Yes, the death penalty is a tool for law enforcement. But it’s not the only tool. For some would-be criminals, the death penalty may be a deterrent. But it’s not, and never will be, for many, many others.

While today’s focus will be on the repeal of the death penalty, I want to make clear that this bill I’m signing actually makes New Mexico safer. With my signature, we now have the option of sentencing the worst criminals to life in prison without the possibility of parole. They will never get out of prison. Faced with the reality that our system for imposing the death penalty can never be perfect, my conscience compels me to replace the death penalty with a solution that keeps society safe.

The bill I am signing today, which was courageously carried for so many years by Representative Gail Chasey, replaces the death penalty with true life without the possibility of parole – a sentence that ensures violent criminals are locked away from society forever, yet can be undone if an innocent person is wrongfully convicted. More than 130 death row inmates have been exonerated in the past 10 years in this country, including four New Mexicans – a fact I cannot ignore.

From an international human rights perspective, there is no reason the United States should be behind the rest of the world on this issue. Many of the countries that continue to support and use the death penalty are also the most repressive nations in the world. That’s not something to be proud of. In a society which values individual life and liberty above all else, where justice and not vengeance is the singular guiding principle of our system of criminal law, the potential for wrongful conviction and, God forbid, execution of an innocent person stands as anathema to our very sensibilities as human beings. That is why I’m signing this bill into law.

New Mexico joins New Jersey as recent converts to abolitionism. Maryland isn't far behind. Could this be the beginning of the end for this barbaric practice?

President: No Confidence in Bulldogs

The White House has posted President Obama's brackets for the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. You can find the Pres' picks here:

I noticed that he predicts Mississippi State to be defeated by Washington in the first round. Perhaps the Ole Miss bag he's been carrying around has worked some osmosis on his thinking?

PS: He does pick Memphis to advance to the Elite Eight, but to lose to Louisville.

Return to Never-Neverland

Just back from a weekend in Berkeley, and the Bold New City aka City of Hospitality is abuzz with the news that Mayor Frank Melt-down does NOT live here! Wow. Maybe I dreamed the last four years??

This being the topic du jour, it gives me the opportunity to connect my World to the new home of NMC (former folo blogger), which is, appropriately, http://nmisscommentor.com.

NMC REALLY does NOT live in Jack-in-the-Box-Town. He has, nevertheless, collected a group of stories on the latest Melt-down drama here: http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=205

My two cents on the Case of the Non-Resident Mayor: If we don't watch out, there's going to be a backlash against the actions of the Feckless Federales and the "See No Melton, Hear No Melton, Speak No Melton" Democratic Committee. The crime-beleaguered citizens of West Jackson may decide that His Frankness is trying his best, and that they won't let The Man take their choices away from them.

Why not just let the Mayor run for re-election, make every effort to defeat him, and take care of business that way? The Federal trial can always be scheduled for after the election.

Rep John Mayo at Millsaps, Monday March 9 at 6 pm

I thought you might want to know that Representative John Mayo will be our guest speaker at the March meeting of Mississippians Educating for Smart Justice. The meeting is Monday night, March 9th at 6:00 p.m., at Room 207 of Murrah Hall, Millsaps Campus. We expect Rep. Mayo to speak on legislative issues regarding capital punishment and criminal law; he has been very active in sponsoring bills on those subjects. He is one of the most accessible legislators in Mississippi, and we are expecting a small, intimate group, so if you have something else you'd like to discuss, I'm sure he'd be willing. Please join us!

Protecting America From Terrorists in the Kitchen

America's least honored ideal in our time is the one carved on the Statue of Liberty: "Bring me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." The anti-immigrant animus -- from Know-Nothingism until today -- is, and always has been, a racial/ethnic animus. You doubt it? Pay attention to how people respond to British accents. Almost always, we are charmed, curious, hospitable to British and other European visitors. Now contrast how people mock Latino or Asian accents. Not the same, is it?

Today's Clarion-Ledger reports the indictment of the former owner of Stix restaurant in Jackson. The story is here:

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20090303/NEWS/90303029/-1/frontpage

The article by Jimmie Gates explains the charges:

A federal grand jury indicted the defendants on Feb. 18 on charges of conspiring to harbor illegal immigrants for the purpose of commercial advantage and private financial gain. If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Judy Chen and Wong also were indicted for harboring illegal immigrants and encouraging illegal immigrants to reside in the United States for the purpose of commercial advantage and private financial gain. The maximum sentence for that offense is also 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each count.

* * * *

In addition, the indictment also recounts the arrest of 15 illegal immigrant employees of Stix Restaurant from May 2006 through March 2008, when the restaurant was ultimately raided by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, where a total of nine additional illegal immigrants were arrested.

Now here's the part that stabbed me in the brain:

Acting U.S. Attorney Stan Harris underscored the U.S. attorney’s office will vigorously prosecute employers who violate federal immigration laws. “The U.S. attorney’s office recognizes that illegal immigration is no longer just an economic issue, but is a national security issue as well.”

Give me a break, Mr. Harris. You think 15 kitchen workers at a sushi-and-steak restaurant is a "national security issue?" What were you afraid they would do? It's not like they could undercook the sushi.

But that's not the only fallacy in his statement. Illegal immigration is NOT an economic issue. That is because, for the last 700+ years, those countries that have more open immigration policies have outperformed the rest by leaps and bounds. The reason is simple: immigrants, by definition, have initiative and a strong work ethic. They ADD value to any economy they join.

Don't take my word for it. The Economist published a comprehensive study on the issue in its January 3, 2008 issue. You can find it on-line (you have to register, but don't need to pay for the privilege) here: http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=894664&story_id=E1_TDQPDNRN

and: http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=894664&story_id=E1_TDNRGTJS

Reason magazine adds its analysis here: http://www.reason.com/news/show/123912.html

The closing of Stix illustrates the point. Once there were 15 immigrants at the restaurant, earning income which was spent on food, rent, and other necessities. Also, the increased staff made it possible for Stix to accommodate more customers, thereby increasing the restaurants' income, which was spent on supplies, food, gas and electricity, the mortgage on the building, etc, etc.

But now the restaurant is closed, and Lakeland Drive is safe from terrorism. Thank you, Mr. Harris.

Dr. West Bites Back

When we last visited, I was astonished by the chutzpah of Dr. Stephen Hayne and Dr. Michael West, the Fabulous Forensic Fabricators who videotaped autopsies that, according to recognized experts in the field, committed "forensic fraud" by, among other things, pressing a defendant's bite mold into a deceased child's chin so as to make "bite marks."

You can see the video for yourself at:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/131527.html

And my previous post is:

http://jimcraigsworld.blogspot.com/2009/02/quacks-with-bite-forensic-fabrications.html

Now Dr. West has surpassed himself. Dr. West gave a whining screed of an interview with the Clarion-Ledger's Jerry Mitchell published here:

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009902280349

Give the poor guy a shoulder to cry on, and who knows what you might learn:

I've exonerated three or four times as many people as I've convicted," he said. "I'm a little old dentist from Hattiesburg, and I've got the top lawyers in the country coming after me. The New York Times wrote an editorial on me. Why? They can't stand the evidence."

Yep, that's it. The Gray Lady bothered to write an article about a Hattiesburg dentist because they "couldn't stand the evidence." I'm sure the editors in Manhattan spend all day worrying about Mississippi defendants.

But in any event, which exonerations would you be talking about, Dr. West? Not Kennedy Brewer and Levon Brooks. After spending more than 15 years each in prison for crimes that they didn't commit, Mr. Brewer and Mr. Brooks were set free in hearings. The District Attorney personally apologized to them.

But Dr. West not only didn't exonerate them -- he still thinks they were involved in the crimes! Jerry Mitchell reports:

In each case, West testified he found those men's bite marks on the victims.

More than a year ago, DNA identified the real culprit, who told authorities he strangled, sexually assaulted and killed two, 3-year-old girls. He said he never bit them.

West - who said he hasn't practiced forensic dentistry in three years - stands by his testimony he gave in those trials, saying the two men must have bitten the girls before they were killed.

Oh, well. I guess we'll find those exonerated prisoners some other time. Or maybe we need to use Dr. West's famous blue light to find them. You know, the one he uses to see evidence nobody else can see. (Yes, he really says that).

But the most interesting thing about the West interview is that he revealed this stunning secret:

He said, "I'm personally opposed to the death penalty."

Shut my mouth. All this time the Periodontal Prevaricator has been sending prisoners to death row for crimes they didn't commit, he was really against capital punishment deep in his heart.

What's next? Dick Cheney is "personally opposed" to gun control? Rush Limbaugh is "personally opposed" to prescription drug abuse?

In the world where Michael West's blue light shines, anything is possible.