Scooter

For those not following the Libby trial here's a brief summation:

Libby is on trial for lying to the FBI and the grand jury about the leak of CIA-agent Valarie Plame's identity.

Libby admits that Cheney told him about Valerie Plame on July 7th, but claims he forgot all about this conversation until he saw a note he made about the conversation much later, after he told the FBI that he did not hear about Plame until Russert told him on July 10th.

Ari Fleisher, Judith Miller, and Matt Cooper, among others, all testified that they talked with Libby about Valerie Plame between July 7th and July 10th.

Russert denies that he told Libby about Plame, claiming that he did not learn about it until Novak's column on July 14th came out.

Libby says he forgot about his conversation with Cheney. Libby claims that even though everyone in the White House, and especially the VP's office, was talking about the Joe Wilson story, he still did not remember that his boss told him this shocking piece of news.

Libby claims that all the reports and Ari are mistaken, that he never talked with them about the case until after Russert told him. He claims that Russert is also mistaken about their conversation. He remembers being taken aback when Russert tells him.

The kicker: the jury has been out for 6 days.

One with the People [Updated]

I am catching the back-end of this story, but it is being carried in many newspapers across the country. It seems that the head of the NBA players union suggested that the union might sue, rather than play the All-Star game in New Orleans next year, if the city isn't "safe" enough.

Or in his words:

On Monday, Hunter told Newsday that, "If the union is not convinced that the city can accommodate the All-Star game, it's an issue that will be subject to litigation between the union and the league."

However, Hunter said he was just speaking hypothetically and would only act if he felt the safety of his players was in jeopardy. He said he anticipates no problems, adding that a number of Hornets players look forward to their return to the city.

"If things for some reason or other were to degenerate to the level where everybody was alarmed, where it just wouldn't make sense to go, in that instance I could always initiate a lawsuit," he said. "That's not to say I'd prevail, but clearly I could do that. But we're nowhere near that, and it was a hypothetical situation to begin with."

I know not everyone considers the sports unions to be "real" unions (unlike, say, grad unions), but seriously, what was the freakin' upside to trashing New Orleans? Whereas the Teamsters are content to be xenophobic about Mexican trucks, the NBA Players Association needs to be xenophobic about people too poor to get the hell out of New Orleans.

Update (hilarious):
From ESPN:

At least one player -- one with police training -- is also concerned.

"I'm not sure if the city of New Orleans is ready for something like that," Shaquille O'Neal, who played at LSU, told Newsday. "I don't know what New Orleans' situation is, but from watching the Spike Lee special and watching the news, it doesn't look like it's ready for something like that."

Spulunkers

What are the odds on Senate Dems not caving to Republicans on the unionization of TSA workers?

I give it 4 to 1 the bill that is sent to Bush does not contain a provision allowing for the unionization of TSA employees. In other words, the Dems will cave.

A Taco Stand at Every Truckstop?

Don't know about you all, but I cringe when my union brothers and sisters seem to rely on anti-immigrant, racist, and fear-of-terrorism arguments. Concerning NAFTA provisions that allow goods from Mexico to be delivered in Mexican trucks, we get this:

Speaking by telephone with VOA, Teamsters Union spokesman Galen Munroe stresses that the number of U.S. inspectors involved in the program is inadequate to the task [of inspecting trucks coming from Mexico].

"It is a real concern of ours from a safety standpoint and, frankly, from a security standpoint," he said. "We do not know what is coming over these borders. They claim they are going to look at each truck and inspect each truck, but they try to do that now and they cannot even do ten percent of the trucks that come over the border."

You combine the Teamster's right-wing history with this kind of jingoism and I am repelled by the anti-NAFTA crowd. These are not the type of arguments I want to associate myself with. I know that some of you do. Anyone want to defend our Teamster brothers (let's face facts) here? If you are opposed to Mexican trucks on American roads, on what grounds? I know I'm wrong on this one, but I still can't seem to see it. And please let's not have any NAFTA is evil because capitalism is evil arguments. Yes, yes, but that has nothing to do with Mexican trucks, "American jobs," or anything that the Teamsters might believe.

Only If You Promise to Tell Me You Love Me

If you're bored, feel free to cruise on over to Seasonville and tell me what you think.

Resolution in Favor of Goodness

Whereas, we have only one Earth, and;

Whereas, Mother Earth is the goddess, and;

Whereas, the goddess loves us and brings us healthful rain and warming sun, and;

Whereas, using sustainable products is one way to show your respect for the goddess, and;

Whereas, respecting the goddess ensures that she will always provide us with a home, and;

Whereas, having a home is good, and;

Whereas, plastic products are made by the corporations that rape the goddess for their own profit;

Therefore, let it be Resolved, that AFT-OR encourages AFT to respect the goddess by using sustainable packaging and products whenever possible, and;

Be it further Resolved, that AFT should just do what is good when deciding between using union-made products and products good for the Earth.

Taxation with Representation

To keep you all up-to-date on the latest Lane County news, and as a follow up to my now disappeared blog entry about the Rural Schools and the Saving the World Act, I will tell you about the new Lane County income tax.

It all started some two years ago when the Lane County Board of Commissioners decided that the county could use a new jail, increased law enforcement equipment/personnel, and some other things that the county "needed." They decided to do this by putting before the voters a county income tax. For those who don't know, Oregon does not have a sales tax and we have capped property taxes, meaning that to raise new funds it has to be an income tax. For a variety of reasons, the tax was defeated. Badly.

Last November, the Commissioners were at it again. This time they called the new tax a "income tax limit." Orwellian. Transparent. Unsuccessful. The divisions over whether to support or oppose this tax were interesting because the "law and order" types tend to be your anti-tax types. And your pro-tax types generally oppose a 1.1% flat tax, which was opposed. But the anti-tax types were thrown the bone of lower property taxes. While your hippies are against more jail space and law enforcement. And PERS income is exempted from the tax, which was the biggest topic of discussion.

Not willing to let "the will of the voters" stop them, the Board of Commissions voted to institute the tax anyway. As you can imagine, this has caused some consternation amongst the folk here in the 541. The Commissioners who voted for the tax claim that they had to because we were faced with the loss of all those federal dollars and they had to pass the tax just to maintain, not add services.

While I hate to find myself on the side of the "nutjobs" who oppose any and all everything the government does, I am not exactly stoked by the new tax. I'm mostly against it because I oppose flat taxes. I would also rather see property taxed, rather than income, so that corporations who own lots of land in the is heavily timbered region have to pay some of this tax. The "income below $20K " exemption doesn't really mollify me, as I don't necessarily think that someone earning $21K is not poor. But it is embarrassing to find yourself metaphorically standing next to someone holding a "No Taxation Without Representation" sign.

Wanna be a Dean?

We've got a funny little situation here at the UO. It started a couple of years ago when our track team didn't do so well. Phil Knight (Nike. For those not from Eugene, Knight ran track at Oregon and that is where he got involved with Bowerman and the shoes) wanted the track coach fired. For whatever reason, Athletic Director Bill Moos didn't fire him (right away, He was fired a year later). Knight, apparently, decided that Moos needed to be fired. Scuttlebutt is that to get Moos fired, Knight pledged not to donate toward the building of a new basketball arena. A couple of months ago Moos announced he was retiring. A couple days later, the UO announced that they were going to buy a security clause for Moos. Essentially, if Moos didn't take another AD job for 5 years (I think), they'd give him $2 million. Anticipating criticism about the golden parachute, the UO got a donor to give the entire buyout cost. This donor, Kilkenny, just happens to be second biggest donor to the UO and a friend of Knight. Got it so far? A friend of Knight paid the Oregon AD $2 million to "retire."

Whatever, right. Of course athletics is run by money and don't give a shit about the larger institution. This is news? Is the Pope still Catholic?

The new twist, the new Nike flash that Oregon is always bringing to the party came when Oregon announced their new AD. How 'bout AD Kilkenny. Yep, the donor took over. He, quite literally, bought the Athletic Director's job at a major sports university. The kicker, of course, is that no one seems to care. The move is largely seen as acceptable. It occurred to me that if they had name Knight the AD, then there'd be outrage. Instead, they just hired the second largest donor and good friend of Knight. Oh well, that's okay, then. As long as you didn't hire Knight. That would be wrong.

Where Were We?

I believe that two of my teacher-unionist friends of mine were advancing the argument that if they really, really love a product (Macintosh), then the politics of the company (or its founder/spokesman) are irrelevant.

I have taken this stance with Coca-Cola.

Can we all agree that we should all get a one-product exemption when it comes to politics and products? What's your exemption?

I Accidentially Deleted My Blog

Crying to commence.