It has been far too long in coming but, yesterday, the Federal Prison Rape Elimination commission released its report on elimination and prevention efforts regarding the biggest social problem nobody wants to talk about: prison rape.
Anyone who looks at the problem can’t react with anything other than horror. According to the Bureau of Justice Statics, over 60,000 prisoners — the great bulk of them male — fall victim to sexual abuse in prison each year. A fair number of these men are “punks” who are subject to frequent, even daily, male-on-male rape for years on end.
The federal report’s conclusions — a zero-tolerance policy, more direct monitoring, and the like — almost are all common sense. State, local, and federal governments should take immediate legislative and administrative action to implement nearly everything in the report. (Most of the practices are already commonplace in the federal and better-run state systems.) Although giving trial lawyers more business rarely makes sense, Congress may also want to reconsider laws that make it very difficult for prisoners to sue prison authorities absent concrete evidence of physical harm. It’s quite possible that many legitimate prison-rape claims get thrown out of court under current laws. And prison rape needs to stop.
These arguments will come from the very people who denied that the economic recovery plan created any jobs. We have a very odd economic philosophy in Washington: It’s called weaponized Keynesianism. It is the view that the government does not create jobs when it funds the building of bridges or important research or retrains workers, but when it builds airplanes that are never going to be used in combat, that is of course economic salvation.
A couple weeks back we had a Preserve Raptor Jobs troll here making the argument, apparently without irony, that the F-22 was economically justifiable because its maintenance and refit costs could potentially stretch fifty or sixty years in the future. In other words, the Raptor is the gift that we keep on paying for.
The second-easiest job in Washington (next to this guy’s) is being a White House correspondent. You show up at press conferences, and ask questions like “Mr. President, are you still smoking?” and “Is the government doing enough about steroid use in baseball?”
You write down the answers, which are then printed in a newspaper.
All this makes you are a high-status journalist, which means you get paid six figures to do a job a chimp could be trained to perform.
And because years of being at the top of your profession have rendered you incapable of doing any actual reporting yourself, you get all your facts wrong.
…UPDATE [by SL]: And then there’s this. Milbank’s obsession with trivia would be a little more palatable if it were less, how do you say, painfully unfunny, or at least if it weren’t more smug than every Pajamas TV host combined.
I strongly endorse Sheehan’s remarks, especially with respect to the comparison with Upshaw:
Don Fehr took on this task and did it very well for a quarter-century. He did it as his peers in the NFL, NBA, and NHL all lost major labor battles and saw their unions weakened, or in the NFL’s case completely broken and turned into a house union. The relative popularity of Fehr and his NFL counterpart, the late Gene Upshaw, ran in inverse proportion to how good each man was at his job of representing the athletes in their charge. Since 1983, when Fehr took over following the brief, unlamented stint of Ken Moffatt, the MLBPA has established itself as the most powerful players’ association in sports, and one of the few successful unions in American labor. They won three grievances over collusion at a time when free agency was still in relative infancy. They beat management in the courts when necessary. Under Fehr’s watch, we’re into the longest stretch of labor peace since the players were serfs.
For this, Fehr became a reviled figure, first for not caving in to MLB’s demands in 1994 and leading the players into a strike that lasted through the World Series, then for defending the principle of privacy, the right to refuse unwarranted searches, and the sanctity of collective bargaining, all as the public, management, and a grandstanding Congressional committee looked to trample all three.
I don’t think it has been linked here yet — I’ve been behind on my LGM reading and posting as the last two days were a sea of meetings, but this was forwarded to me by a colleague who “does” Iran. I won’t go into too much detail, but suffice it to say that she knows Iran well. The core argument of the piece is that Rafsanjani knows precisely what he is doing in the midst of all this, and he is attempting to “outflank supreme leader Khamenei” et al.
When chatting about it before (and, admittedly, during) one of the meetings over the past two days, we both were shocked at just how ineptly Khamenei and allies have played this. Dude, game theory. Check it out. But it may be a little late, as the linked article suggests:
“To a certain degree, hardliners now find themselves caught in a cycle of doom: they must crack down on protesters if they are to have any chance of retaining power, but doing so only causes more and more clerics to align against them.”
If the linked analysis has legs, it could be interesting . . .
Gov. Mark Sanford arrived in the Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport this morning, having wrapped up a seven-day visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, he said. Sanford said he had not been hiking along the Appalachian Trail, as his staff said in a Tuesday statement to the media.
Sanford’s whereabouts had been unknown since Thursday, and the mystery surrounding his absence fueled speculation about where he had been and who’s in charge in his absence. His emergence Wednesday ended the mystery.
Sanford, in an exclusive interview with The State, said he decided at the last minute to go to the South American country to recharge after a difficult legislative session in which he battled with lawmakers over how to spend federal stimulus money.
Well, there goes one GOP Presidential hopeful. I’m just glad that someone is back in control of South Carolina’s nuclear weapons.
Kicks off 19:30 (BST), 14:30 (EDT), 11:30 (PDT). I think I have the times right this time, but the aforementioned “love of my life” from the previous post on the Egypt match did take a certain delight in my public embarrassment.
In my first post on the Confederations Cup back on June 15, I said one thing that appears prescient in retrospect, ” . . . who knows, with just a bit of luck, maybe they make it out of the group.” As Paul points out, by the final group stage match, luck was definitely required.
I also stated in that first post that the “Smart money’s on Spain to win this thing, of course.” I still have to agree with this initial assessment of the tournament. Indeed, if Spain draw or win, they will set a record of 36 straight matches without defeat. For such record book purposes, if a match goes to penalties, which this one would do in the event of a draw, it counts as a draw even if Spain were to lose the penalty shootout. Thus when I argue with my British / European friends and colleagues that the USA were the only side to take a point off of Italy in the 2006 World Cup, it’s technically not true, as France held Italy to a draw in the final. When I make this claim, I oddly fail to elaborate on such pedantic details.
Bocanegra should be fit, and Sacha Kljestan is back from suspension, thus well rested. While Kljestan may well be correct in his assertion that it is “time for them to lose one”, this loss by Spain is more likely to be Brazil in the final than the USA in the semi-final. I look forward to a third-place match between the USA and the hosts, South Africa. It’s this degree of optimism that prevented me from heading to the bookies before the Egypt match with £10 for the USA to advance . . .
Judge John J. Fleming thought this didn’t merit any jail time, because a two-minute vicious beating of an 115-pound woman by a 250-pound drunk psychopath only resulted in “some bumps and bruises.”
Of course part of this is that scumbag cops are protected routinely by the system (I had to laugh when I read that the perpetrator “had no previous criminal record” — this was the third person he beat up that day!), but the more interesting possibility is that the judge sincerely believes this wasn’t a serious crime, even though the victim testified to suffering serious long-term psychological damage.
He seems to be using an interpretive frame in which this is a “barroom fight,” as opposed to a vicious beating of a small relatively weak person by a big strong one. (The victim had refused to serve the assailant any more drinks).
At least the Chicago police department is trying to fire the guy. The determinative hearing is in a couple of weeks.
Meanwhile the learned judge has a retention election coming up.
While the Court’s decision not to strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act — at least, not yet — was probably the best outcome that could have been expected, the same was certainly not true of another of the Court’s decisions yesterday, which went along with a Bush administration decision allowing a company to dump large amounts of extremely toxic chemicals into a a lake on the grounds that the toxic slurry was “fill material” rather than a “pollutant,” and hence a permit could be granted by the Army Corps of Engineers rather than the EPA.
Good one. I suppose seeing the world-historical importance of Obama eating ice cream while there is any injustice anywhere in the world is a close cousin to warbloggers who believe that linking to Steven Den Beste posts and saying “heh” is a form of combat, or warboggers who believe that changing their font to green — and maybe even posting staggeringly unfunny null anaology twitters — is of world-historical importance…