Morus
The BBC is now reporting that Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, the only man ever convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, is to be released by the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill MSP, with a press conference due at 13:00 BST (10:00 EST). He will be released on compassionate grounds, as he has terminal prostate cancer and has a life expectancy of only another three months. It is expected that he will be greeted on his return by Colonel Gaddafi
The Lockerbie Bombing is the shorthand name given to the terrorist attack 21st December 1988 on Pan Am Flight 103 - a Boing Aircraft that was brought down by a mid-air explosion, killing 243 passengers, 16 crew, and 11 people in the village of Lockerbie in Scotland, UK, where the wreckage came down. Many of the dead were American citizens, given that the flight was between London Heathrow and New York JFK.
The US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and seven US Senators including John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, had publically requested that al Megrahi be kept in prison for the full 27-year life term (he has served only 8 years), but the Scottish Justice Secretary disagreed.
Why is this important? Take a look below the fold.
Poll 115 votes Show Results Should al Megrahi have been kept in a Scottish jail until death/27 years served? released on non-compassionate grounds released on compassionate grounds 115 votes Vote Now! Should al Megrahi have been kept in a Scottish jail until death/27 years served? 71 votes released on non-compassionate grounds 3% 4 votes released on compassionate grounds 40 votes
I like Twitter. I don't really give a damn about what colour shirts you're choosing between this morning, but that's not why I'm on it. I use Twitter for precisely two purposes. One is as the world's largest organic search engine, including bringing me bits and pieces that I wasn't even searching for - I follow people who are vaguely interested in the same things as me, and so I like much of what they recommend, especially when I would never have found it on my own.
But the other thing I like about Twitter is the hashtag trends. Hashtags (like #obama or #glastonbury) are like tags that make Twitter searchable - they can be used for comic effect, or to unite disparate Twitterers who like the same thing. The most common are listed on the right-hand tool bar.
The most-used hashtags are normally big events (like TED or festivals) or big news stories (like #Iranianelection) - but at the moment, the top trending hastag on Twitter is a response to Dan Hannan MEP - a British Conservative and Blogger who wants to reform the National Health Service, moving away from fully-socialised healthcare: there are tens of thousands of Tweets now sporting the hashtag #welovetheNHS declaring their support for Socialised Medicine.
Poll 57 votes Show Results Do you favour... Private-sector only Insurance model Private insurance, public option for some Private insurance, public option for all who want it Single-payer (public option only) Fully-socialised medicine (with private optional add-on too) - like UK Fully-socialised medicine - no private healthcare at all Pie 57 votes Vote Now! Do you favour... Private-sector only Insurance model 4% 2 votes Private insurance, public option for some 0% 0 votes Private insurance, public option for all who want it 11 votes Single-payer (public option only) 10 votes Fully-socialised medicine (with private optional add-on too) - like UK 27 votes Fully-socialised medicine - no private healthcare at all 9% 5 votes Pie 4% 2 votes
There's been a lot of pessimism on here recently, especially since it became almost certain that a Healthcare Reform Bill won't be passed before the Recess, and it has attracted those who are becoming sceptical of the Public Option as presented, those for whom only Single Payer would do, and those who feel that their wishlists are being neglected (LGBT rights comes to mind).
I think some of the pessimism is overplayed, but the doommongers do have a point: a much-loved new President with a mandate (at least in Electoral College Votes), a decent majority (recently increased) in the House, and a full 60 Democratic Senators in the US Senate. Most American Governors and State Legislators are Democrats, the party has bigger and better names on the bench than the GOP, and that party is tearing itself apart whilst having the least coherent policy platform for any time since Goldwater: why isn't this easier?!?!
And therein lies the problem. The GOP is wrong, categorically, on most of the contentious policy issues of the day. They are weak politically and electorally - at their lowest legislative ebb in decades. And yet still they are able to derail the centrepiece of what should be this Adminsitration's Legacy: universal healthcare.
Why? Well I've got a suggestion for you beneath the fold.
Poll 36 votes Show Results I think... there is no such thing as a 'natural party of government' there is such a thing, and it is the GOP, and always will be there is such a thing, and it is the Democrats, and always will be there is such a thing, but not in the USA the NPoG is the GOP at the moment, but it will become the Dems the NPoG is the Dems, but we are in danger of losing it to the GOP Pie 36 votes Vote Now! I think... there is no such thing as a 'natural party of government' 15 votes there is such a thing, and it is the GOP, and always will be 8% 3 votes there is such a thing, and it is the Democrats, and always will be 6% 2 votes there is such a thing, but not in the USA 3% 1 vote the NPoG is the GOP at the moment, but it will become the Dems 7 votes the NPoG is the Dems, but we are in danger of losing it to the GOP 4 votes Pie 4 votes
So I doubt many of you have been fixated by what's going on in British politics recently, but a little news.
An old friend of mine, Chloe Smith, has just been elected the Member of Parliament for Norwich North in a by-election (special election). Chloe is, at the tender age of 27, now the youngest member of the House of Commons, conferring upon her the title of Baby of the House (taken from Jo Swinson MP - a Lib Dem).
The US also has the Baby and the Father/Mother of the House: the Dean of the House of Representative is Rep John Dingell (D, MI-15) and the Senate Pro Temis Sen Robert Byrd (D-WV) is also the Dean of the Senate. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) is the Baby of the Senate, and in the House it is 27-year-old Aaron Schock (R, IL-18).
Chloe will take her place on the Green Benches in October, when Parliament returns from its record 82-day recess. She will be forced to refight her seat within the year - any time between October and June 4th 2010 - depending when the Prime Minister requests that the Queen dissolve Parliament and trigger a General Election.
Poll 37 votes Show Results The Conservatives will... lose the next General Election stop Labour from getting an overall majority, but still come 2nd will be the largest party in a Hung Parliament will win an overall majority of fewer than 50 seats will win an overall majority of between 50 - 100 seats will win an overall majority of more than 100 seats Pie / don't know / don't care 37 votes Vote Now! The Conservatives will... lose the next General Election 4 votes stop Labour from getting an overall majority, but still come 2nd 5% 2 votes will be the largest party in a Hung Parliament 8% 3 votes will win an overall majority of fewer than 50 seats 8 votes will win an overall majority of between 50 - 100 seats 8 votes will win an overall majority of more than 100 seats 9 votes Pie / don't know / don't care 8% 3 votes
No-one here will be pleased that Senate Majority Leader Reid has assented to Republican and Blue Dog requests for a delay in passing a Healthcare Bill that would make Universal Coverage a reality
I think that the Democratic Leadership have been too soft all throughout this process - when we heard Rahm Emanuel was being appointed Chief of Staff, wasn't it precisely to knock heads together over things like this? Reid has proved to be the most ineffective of Senate Majority leaders, especially when one considers the size of the majority that he gets to lead.
With a clear majority in the House, the White House, and a filibuster-proof Senate, a public option before August should have been the bare minimum that was acceptable. With that set-up, I think the lack of a single payer bill is a little disappointing, but victories where they are possible...
I've called before for the Congressional Democrats to be whipped senseless (it's a pun). If Senator Reid won't do his job, then Rahm Emanuel should do it for him. President Obama should now invoke the powers granted him by Article II, Section 3, and bring back both Houses from their recess.
Poll 134 votes Show Results Should Obama invoke Article II, Section 3? Yes Maybe No PIE 134 votes Vote Now! Should Obama invoke Article II, Section 3? Yes 109 votes Maybe 5% 7 votes No 15 votes PIE 2% 3 votes
I know what you're thinking. "Fox News jumped the shark? Please - they've been doing somersaults over hammerheads since October 8th 1996 (it took them 24 hours to get their bearings)". And you'd be right - but this is Special.
UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE: BREEDING GROUND FOR TERRORISM?
Based on the fact that a failed suicide bomber (failed both parts - still alive, and his bombs didn't go off in London) who attacked Glasgow Airport a couple of years ago was an NHS doctor, Fox reckons that there might be systemic reasons why National Healthcare is useful to terrorists.
Poll 210 votes Show Results Which Democratic policy most leaves us open to terror? Universal Healthcare Gay Marriage Reproductive Rights Cap and Trade Anti-gun laws Higher taxes Were you born this paranoid, or did it take practice? PIE 210 votes Vote Now! Which Democratic policy most leaves us open to terror? Universal Healthcare 1% 2 votes Gay Marriage 3% 6 votes Reproductive Rights 3% 6 votes Cap and Trade 9% 18 votes Anti-gun laws 8% 17 votes Higher taxes 7% 15 votes Were you born this paranoid, or did it take practice? 99 votes PIE 47 votes
There's a great bit of willy-waving going on at the moment between Bloomberg and the UK Spectator magazine, who have both chosen this weekend to write about the top political scandals of all time.
Bloomberg have listed a predictable top 10 of US political scandals that are, in the view of the magazine once nicknamed the Sextator for the overactive libidos of its contributing editors, rather tame compared to their US equivalents. The Spectator blog is here
TheBloomberg list compiled by Albert R Hunt are all rather modest variations on the 'married US politician has an affair' theme: Clinton/Lewinski comes in at number 1, Larry Craig is about the most amusing fandango on the list, and few of them are politically interesting except for the Sanford neglect of duty or the hypocrisy of moralising about families before running off with a stripped.
I've decided to compile a brief head-to-head to show quite how far the US has to go before it can claim it's scandals are equal to the immoral farce that we get to enjoy over in the UK.
Poll 33 votes Show Results Best scandal? Lord Robert Boothby, the PM's wife and gangster Ronnie Kray Kwame Kilpatrick, the strippers, the jobs, the mansion, the drugs Jeremy Thorpe, the gay lover, the hitman and the dead dog Cash for Questions, Mohammed Al-Fayed and Neil Hamilton Jonathan Aitken, the 'sword of truth', perjury and the Paris Ritz Expenses Scandal 2009 - the duck island, moat and phantom mortgages Smeargate - Guido Fawkes, Derek Draper, Damien McBride Watergate - DNC, Cuban burglars, Nixon, secret tapes, smoking gun Profumo affair, Christine Keeler, the Soviet Spy, the pimp's suicide SpyCatcher - the Prime Minister and head of MI5 were KGB spies? The Cambridge Spy Ring - Blunt, Burgiss and Philby et al Larry Craig or other US scandals Ron Davies or other UK scandals US-UK? Clearly you haven't heard about France/Italy/Spain etc etc PIE - it would be a scandal if I couldn't vote for it 33 votes Vote Now! Best scandal? Lord Robert Boothby, the PM's wife and gangster Ronnie Kray 4 votes Kwame Kilpatrick, the strippers, the jobs, the mansion, the drugs 4 votes Jeremy Thorpe, the gay lover, the hitman and the dead dog 6% 2 votes Cash for Questions, Mohammed Al-Fayed and Neil Hamilton 6% 2 votes Jonathan Aitken, the 'sword of truth', perjury and the Paris Ritz 0% 0 votes Expenses Scandal 2009 - the duck island, moat and phantom mortgages 0% 0 votes Smeargate - Guido Fawkes, Derek Draper, Damien McBride 6% 2 votes Watergate - DNC, Cuban burglars, Nixon, secret tapes, smoking gun 4 votes Profumo affair, Christine Keeler, the Soviet Spy, the pimp's suicide 5 votes SpyCatcher - the Prime Minister and head of MI5 were KGB spies? 3% 1 vote The Cambridge Spy Ring - Blunt, Burgiss and Philby et al 3% 1 vote Larry Craig or other US scandals 0% 0 votes Ron Davies or other UK scandals 0% 0 votes US-UK? Clearly you haven't heard about France/Italy/Spain etc etc 5 votes PIE - it would be a scandal if I couldn't vote for it 9% 3 votes
I wrote a fairly bog standard diary last week about the need for the Democratic Party Whips to exercise some backbone in favour of progressive solutions to healthcare. There was nothing too controversial I didn't think.
Thing is, the whole of the comments thread (and I can't say I wasn't warned) became a discussion on whether or not I should change my Headline. I had chosen "Democratic Legislators Should Be Whipped Senseless". Contrary to some of the comments, I wasn't advocating violence, and I certainly didn't think I needed to be compared to Dick Cheney: the positions of House and Senate Majority Whip are rooted in Parliamentary practice of whipping MPs through the correct lobby for voting. Doing this properly is sometimes called "whipping them senseless" as they forfeit any pretence at individual decision-making.
To my mind, the Headline did exactly what it should do - play on the line of ambiguity of the verb 'whipping' to attract attention, without being sweary, angry, or offensive. And this is where I've realised there is a culture clash: you guys grew up with the NYT and WaPo - I grew up in the UK with the Sun and the Mirror. And so a couple of ideas...
Poll 13 votes Show Results I would like Diary Headlines to be... as dull and sensible as possible a bit more lively perhaps more humour and brevity, but strict ban on profane jokes Let it all out! PIE 13 votes Vote Now! I would like Diary Headlines to be... as dull and sensible as possible 2 votes a bit more lively perhaps 0% 0 votes more humour and brevity, but strict ban on profane jokes 3 votes Let it all out! 8 votes PIE 0% 0 votes
I can appreciate that perhaps the Obama/Axelrod talking points about wanting healthcare reform to be bi-partisan are part of a political game. I would like to believe that they are gunning hard for the public option, and that concessions at this stage are part of looking the more reasonable party. They are both masters of the game of political persuasion, and making sure that they appear in-step with the public, and that their opponents look the worst sort of political opportunists. I get that, honestly I do. However, when it comes to fixing healthcare, I don't think they should bother.
There are plenty of contentious issues like tax cuts, stimulus packages, DADT, that benefit from bi-partisan support: the thinking being that by getting Congressmen and Senators from the other side to support it, you render the issue election-proof in the next campaign, and reduce the chance of it being reversed when you finally lose the reins of power.
Healthcare isn't one of those: this can, indeed should, be the boldest - and if necessary, most partisan - piece of legislation that Obama will see passed. Partly because it matters so much, and partly because once passed it will never be revoked. With these big majorities in both Houses, this should be an internal issue, settled by the whips.
Poll 73 votes Show Results Public option: would you Give away the store for a bi-partisan bill Give away the shop-sign only for some token GOP votes Forget the GOP exist, and hope the Dems come to their senses This is an internal party matter, and anyone who doesn't support the President can start drafting their resume and applying for an exit visa PIE 73 votes Vote Now! Public option: would you Give away the store for a bi-partisan bill 5% 4 votes Give away the shop-sign only for some token GOP votes 3% 2 votes Forget the GOP exist, and hope the Dems come to their senses 31 votes This is an internal party matter, and anyone who doesn't support the President can start drafting their resume and applying for an exit visa 34 votes PIE 3% 2 votes
So news comes from Iran:
This week, members of Iran's Islamic regime finally pinpointed the cause of mass protests that have brought hundreds of thousands of people to the streets in the days since a contentious presidential election. It was not popular will, or angry opposition supporters who felt cheated, or even the Internet. No, according to Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in an address to his ambassadors, it went like this: First, the British government secretly ordered British Airways to swap all its scheduled flights to Tehran with larger 747 jets, which it packed with hand-picked “passengers … with special intelligence and security ambitions,” who flooded into downtown Tehran, received orders from coded messages on the BBC's Persian-language network, and persuaded thousands of otherwise unwilling Iranians to protest. Within Iran, this is the most widely accepted and popular explanation for the events that have threatened to tear the country in two this month: It was a British plot.
This week, members of Iran's Islamic regime finally pinpointed the cause of mass protests that have brought hundreds of thousands of people to the streets in the days since a contentious presidential election.
It was not popular will, or angry opposition supporters who felt cheated, or even the Internet. No, according to Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in an address to his ambassadors, it went like this: First, the British government secretly ordered British Airways to swap all its scheduled flights to Tehran with larger 747 jets, which it packed with hand-picked “passengers … with special intelligence and security ambitions,” who flooded into downtown Tehran, received orders from coded messages on the BBC's Persian-language network, and persuaded thousands of otherwise unwilling Iranians to protest.
Within Iran, this is the most widely accepted and popular explanation for the events that have threatened to tear the country in two this month: It was a British plot.
Poll 88 votes Show Results Best person to foment Iranian revolution? David Miliband, Foreign Secretary The Duke of Edinburgh David Beckham The Toothfairy Santa Claus James Bond John Cleese and cast of Monty Python The Archbishop of Canterbury Simon Cowell Peter Lord Mandelson, Prince of Darkness PIE-rs Morgan Other perfidious Brits 88 votes Vote Now! Best person to foment Iranian revolution? David Miliband, Foreign Secretary 2% 2 votes The Duke of Edinburgh 5% 4 votes David Beckham 9% 8 votes The Toothfairy 3% 3 votes Santa Claus 6% 5 votes James Bond 10 votes John Cleese and cast of Monty Python 32 votes The Archbishop of Canterbury 5% 4 votes Simon Cowell 11 votes Peter Lord Mandelson, Prince of Darkness 9% 8 votes PIE-rs Morgan 1% 1 vote Other perfidious Brits 0% 0 votes
I greatly enjoyed reading the diary of my compatriot ignatz uk on his/her experiences of working in Health Insurance and why a single payer option is necessary. I respectfully disagree.
I am soon to be moving to the US from London, and having to get to grips with Health Insurance policies is one of the ugliest frustrations of the move: compared to US tax returns, visas, and finding accommodation - nothing is as irritating as being told that my medical wellbeing depends on the legal gymnastics employed by a corporate entity. For all its faults, I will miss the British NHS more than marmalade and Test Match Cricket.
I agree that single payer might be something of an improvement if you have already accepted that insurance is an acceptable model for delivering general healthcare, but my Anglo-centric view of the world is that universal public healthcare, paid for through progressive general taxation, is simply the only acceptable way to support the health of a population in a civilised country.
Poll 50 votes Show Results I favour... A universal public service, funded by general taxation, free at point of use A public insurance option, co-existing with private insurance options No public option, but shift to universal single payer private insurance Private insurance, without the move to universal single payer Moving to somewhere else that has free universal healthcare Pie 50 votes Vote Now! I favour... A universal public service, funded by general taxation, free at point of use 42 votes A public insurance option, co-existing with private insurance options 8% 4 votes No public option, but shift to universal single payer private insurance 0% 0 votes Private insurance, without the move to universal single payer 8% 4 votes Moving to somewhere else that has free universal healthcare 0% 0 votes Pie 0% 0 votes
I was prompted to write this diary after reading sandbox's diary earlier today.
As many of you will know, President Sarkozy of France has recently spoken in favour of prohibiting women in France from wearing the burqa, as he feels that an 'oppressive' symbol of religiosity is not compatible with France's commitment to a secular Republic.
This comes amidst the growing threat of 'culture wars' in Europe, with massive immigration from Turkey, North Africa and the Indian sub-continent leading to what right-wing commentators claim is an 'Islamification' of the EU. They invoke the term 'dhimmitude' to express the reluctance of government to stand against (eg) moves to introduce Sharia Law into the law of EU member states. 'Dhimmis' are 'protected persons' (usually Christians or Jews) who are not Muslim living in a territory governed by Sharia - they are permitted to continue being non-muslims if they forfeit certain civil and political rights, and if they acknowledge their subjugation to Sharia.
This fear of 'dhimmitude' (the status of becoming 'dhimmis' on the right has led to the election of extreme parties across Europe - Geert Wilders' Freedom Party in Holland and the British National Party (neoNazi) in the UK.
Poll 186 votes Show Results I would ban... Burqa Burqa and niqab Burqa, niqab, and hijab All Islamic dress All Islamic dress, crucifix necklaces, and yamulke etc etc Muslims, Christians and Jews themselves We shouldn't ban any of these things Pie 186 votes Vote Now! I would ban... Burqa 8% 15 votes Burqa and niqab 21 votes Burqa, niqab, and hijab 6% 12 votes All Islamic dress 27 votes All Islamic dress, crucifix necklaces, and yamulke etc etc 6% 11 votes Muslims, Christians and Jews themselves 6% 12 votes We shouldn't ban any of these things 79 votes Pie 5% 9 votes
Upload logo
Choose a logo image in .gif, .jpg, or .png format.
Delete logo
Choose File