On whether we can believe Trent Lott that he has changed his beliefs, Sam Heldman (Ignatz) has a pretty good litmus test and then applies it to Lott:

"So how can we begin to tell the difference between those who changed their beliefs on this issue of great importance, and those who did not? Let's even leave aside Senator Lott's voting behavior for purposes of this discussion. Here is one way you can tell: people who make major transformations on important moral beliefs tend, if they have actually made an honest change, not to whitewash their past. Let me be more plain: if you've really changed, you don't lie about where you changed from. True change is accompanied by honesty."

So has Trent Lott been honest? Go read Sam and find out why not.

The Canadians want to decriminalize pot possession, as we reported here. U.S. Drug Czar John Walters is opposed to the idea and suggests it will present a problem with border crime. He went to Buffalo last week to make a speech about it.

How did the Canadians respond to Walters? Butt out, it's none of your business.

The czar of anti-drug enforcement in the U.S. told us Thursday that we in Canada shouldn't lower the penalties for possession of pot because marijuana is bad for us, especially if we're thinking of crossing the border.

Just to make sure we heard him, John Walters came all the way from Washington to Buffalo to deliver his message, just as a committee of MPs was recommending that people who possess or cultivate less than 30 grams of pot should not face criminal prosecution, but a fine.

Walters, the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, should have saved himself the trip. How we deal with drugs or any other domestic issue is up to us, not the White House. The laws we pass apply to our citizens, and how they are perceived in the U.S. or anywhere else has nothing to do with it.

Walters would like us to deal more harshly with the traffickers and big-time growers, and we should. But we're dealing with our recreational pot-smokers the way we think is appropriate, and Walters should butt out.

Matt Welch takes on Bush's continued appointment of Republicans with criminal histories.

"If [Winona] Ryder lived in Florida instead of California, she would join the 31% of the black voting-age population there in being barred from enjoying the most basic of democratic rights. (Conversely, if Florida had Maine's more liberal voting laws, Al Gore would be president.)"

"Regardless of what you think about a system that disenfranchises more than four million Americans, the rationale is clear enough: For citizens wishing to have a say in public life, some crimes are beyond the pale of acceptable behaviour. The rule of law, and perhaps even the imperative of national self- defence, demands no less."

"Unless, that is, the criminal is a Republican politician."

First up for Welch is Elliott Abrams: "In October, 1991, Abrams pleaded guilty to two counts of a misdemeanor far graver than anything Winona Ryder has inflicted upon society: "Withholding information" from the United States Congress."

"Abrams lied to the representatives of the American people about his team subverting the law, in order to manipulate Congress to enact legislation that it probably wouldn't if it knew the truth. He violated his oath, broke the law and abused power."

Now Abrams is "Condoleezza Rice's right-hand man in the Middle East."

Welch says "Abrams is worth mentioning at length not because his case is extraordinary, but because the opposite is true: Bush has been making a habit of appointing known liars and once-convicted Republican officials to key government positions."

As to Poindexter, architect of the invasive yet-to-be-implemented Total Information Awareness program, Welch says: "Poindexter, Reagan's national security advisor, was convicted in 1990 of five felony counts of lying to Congress, obstructing Iran-Contra investigators, destroying evidence and so on. An appeals court overturned the conviction on the grounds that it had relied partially on testimony Poindexter gave under immunity. He was appointed this February to run the Pentagon's much-maligned Total Information Awareness program."

There's more, go on over and read the whole thing.

Don't miss the Beast's 50 Most Loathsome People in America --it's funny, provacative and just mean enough without being ugly. (link via Rittenhouse).

Here's a synopsis of why civil libertarians are uneasy:

The U.S.A. Patriot Act has conferred huge concentrations of power on the executive branch.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has made it easier for the federal government to access personal and business records, and relaxed authorization of Internet surveillance and wiretaps.

Hundreds of deportation hearings have been held in secret by the Immigration and Naturalization Service -- without a jury and without access by the defendants to legal counsel.

Attorney General John Ashcroft has given the Justice Department authority to monitor talks between detainees and their lawyers, without a court order -- despite constitutional guarantees of an unimpeded right to counsel.

Then there is the Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS) that would have created about 11 million informants -- such as mail carriers, utility employees and others with unique access to private homes. Their mission was to help the Justice Department build yet another database containing names of persons not charged with any wrong doing.

And now, there is Poindexter and his Total Information Awareness Program which would create a huge database of our personal and financial records.

No wonder it's 1 AM and we're still up.

"The Los Angeles City Council gave initial approval Friday to a law that would allow police to seize and sell vehicles used by motorists while soliciting prostitutes."

"The ordinance, which was given unanimous council approval but requires a second vote next Tuesday, was endorsed by Police Chief William J. Bratton as a way to address a problem plaguing some Los Angeles neighborhoods."

"Bratton said a similar law proved effective in New York City when he headed the department there. "It's intended to be another tool to discourage people from using their cars to solicit prostitution," Bratton said after the vote. LAPD officials said the department has primarily targeted prostitutes and pimps for enforcement action in the past. Friday's vote represents the city's most ambitious effort to go after their customers."

Police intend to use the law in sting operations in which "female police officers pose as prostitutes and tape solicitations before making arrests. Proceeds from car sales would be divided between the Police Department and the city attorney's office."

The ACLU charges that the law is unconsitutional. But a similar ordinance in Oakland was upheld by the California Supreme Court.

In Bennis v. Michigan, 116 S. CT. 994 (1996), the Supreme Court upheld the seizure and forfeiture of a wife's interest in a car she owned jointly with her husband after her husband used the car without her knowledge to patronize a prostitute. The car was declared a "public nusiance" under Michigan law, which did not have an innocent owner defense.

The Supreme Court ruled neither 14th Amendment's due process nor the unjust takings clause of the 5th Amendment was violated by the law's failure to include a defense for innocent owners--an innocent owner being one who could establish that they had no knowledge or reason to know the vehicle would be used illegally. Justice Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion. Justices O’Connor, Scalia, Thomas and Ginsburg joined in the result.

Justice Ginsberg and Thomas wrote separate opinions, agreeing with the result. Ginsberg said:

“Michigan has decided to deter Johns from using cars they own (or co-own) to contribute to neighborhood blight, and that abatement endeavor hardly warrants this Court’s approbation”.

Justice Thomas said:

“This case is ultimately a reminder that the Federal Constitution does not prohibit everything that is intensely undesirable” ....

“The limits on what property can be forfeited as a result of what wrongdoing- for example, what it means to ‘use’ property in crime for purposes of forfeiture law- are not clear to me”.

Justice Stevens, joined by Justices Souter and Breyer, dissented:

“The principal use of the car in this case was not to provide a site for petitioner’s husband to carry out forbidden trysts. Indeed, there is no evidence in the record that the car had ever previously been used for a similar purpose. An isolated misuse of a stationary vehicle should not justify the forfeiture of an innocent owner’s property on the theory that it constituted an instrumentality of the crime”.

“Apart from the lack of a sufficient nexus between petitioner’s car and the offense her husband committed, I would reverse because petitioner is entirely without responsibility for that act. Fundamental fairness prohibits the punishment of innocent people.”

Justice Kennedy also dissented, arguing:

“This forfeiture cannot meet the requirements of due process. Nothing in the rationale of the Michigan Supreme Court indicates that the forfeiture turned on the negligence or complicity of petitioner, or a presumption thereof, and nothing supports the suggestion that the value of her co-ownership is so insignificant as to be beneath the law’s protection.”

****
The moral of the story is that if you live in a county or city that has a public nuisance abatement law, check and see if it provides a defense for an innocent owner. If not, contact your legislator or city councilperson and ask them to draft remedial legislation.

Busted: Stone Cowboys, Narco-Lords and Washington's War on Drugs
Mike Gray, Editor

Buy the Book Today!

Busted, a new anthology, builds a convincing argument for the legalization of all drugs -- from heroin to methamphetamine to LSD. Spanning three decades, it tells readers why the War on Drugs has failed, charting the violence, chaos, and corruption that the War on Drugs has spawned. It includes frontline reporting from all over the world, literary journalism, public records, and provocative commentary from the left and right.

We were driving home from court in the mountains yesterday and had the chance to catch Trent Lott's news conference live and listen to the analysis on PBS's All Things Considered. We were interested in the Republican reaction to his statements, as that will be what determines his fate. Bill Kristol, a conservative and Editor of the Weekly Standard and EJ Dionne from the Washington Post were the guest commentators. Here's some of what they said (from the transcript, available on Lexis):

"In the studio with us now to talk more about both Henry Kissinger resigning and Trent Lott not resigning are Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, and E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post. Let's start first with the news conference Senator Lott held this afternoon in Mississippi.

Bill Kristol, we heard Trent Lott apologize yet again for his remarks about Strom Thurmond. Will it be enough to allow him to keep his job?

Mr. BILL KRISTOL (The Weekly Standard): I'm not sure. It really depends on whether his colleagues want him to be majority leader, to be Republican leader of the Senate for the next two years. Again, no one has really called on him to resign as senator from Mississippi. Lott, I think, is alighting the differences between resigning as senator and serving as Republican leader. My sense from talking to Republicans on the Hill is they would prefer to have another leader. My sense from talking to people in the White House is that they would prefer to have someone else of the 51 Republican senators be the Republican leader for the next couple of years. The question is: Will the White House push Lott hard? Will the White House help encourage another Republican senator to stand forward and offer himself as an alternative to Lott, or at least another Republican senator to step forward and say, 'Senator Lott must go.'

Mr. E.J. DIONNE (The Washington Post; The Brookings Institution): Well, first of all, Bill is right. This is all in the hands of the Republican Party and, indeed, to a large degree this has been driven by criticism from Republicans. I think the strongest group in favor of Lott remaining are Democrats, who would like to have him around as leader for a couple of years after all of this.

In my conversations today, you know, Republicans were talking about what a great leader somebody like Bill Frist of Tennessee might make. There are Republicans who are very partisan toward Don Nickles. The problem is none of these people can be the people who push Trent Lott out. And there's a real question of whether there are senators who will take the chance of being the first to push him out and then having a coup fail. You can never try to kill the king unless you succeed, in the old expression.

We found an excellent left-leaning, free news aggregator called The President Evil News Portal. You can select your publications from a great variety of choices, in the U.S. and abroad, and it will return the current news headlines, most with descriptions of the articles, all on one page. It even includes TalkLeft's blog postings as an option.

Other news aggregators we like are What Really Happened and re-broadcaster Take Back the Media.

And of course we want to mention TalkLeft's own newsfeed which we create manually and update at least once a day. It's on the left hand side of the TalkLeft home page.

Dwight Meredith is taking nominations for the "Koufax Award" for best left of center blogging in various categories. Check out Body and Soul's nominations, they are top notch. And we'd say that even if we weren't on Jeanne's list.

From LA Weekly, The Terror War on Drugs.

Sad personal stories, but people should know about them. For more on efforts to change the irrational, ill-advised, unjust, discriminatory drug law penalties in the U.S., take a visit over to FAMM (Families Against Mandatory Minimums) and acquaint yourself with their terrific work.

Pass the word on the good news this week: The Michigan Legislature has repealed that state's draconian mandatory minimum drug sentences:

"A bipartisan majority of the Michigan Senate today passed a historic package of three sentencing reform bills – HB 5394 (H-3), HB 5395 (H-2) and HB 6510 (H-1) – that eliminate most of the state’s Draconian mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses. Governor John Engler is expected to sign the bills"

Here is FAMM's fact sheet on the Michigan laws.

The International Herald Tribune last week featured an article and poll on the rising anti-American tide as demonstated by a survey of global citizens' attitudes to themselves and the world. The poll was conducted by the non-partisan Pew research center in Washington.

"Despite an initial outpouring of public sympathy for America following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, discontent with the United States has grown around the world over the past two years. Images of the U.S. have been tarnished in all types of nations: among longtime NATO allies, in developing countries, in Eastern Europe and, most dramatically, in Muslim societies."

"Since 2000, favorability ratings for the U.S. have fallen in 19 of the 27 countries where trend benchmarks are available. While criticism of America is on the rise, however, a reserve of goodwill toward the United States still remains. The Pew Global Attitudes survey finds that the U.S. and its citizens continue to be rated positively by majorities in 35 of the 42 countries in which the question was asked. True dislike, if not hatred, of America is concentrated in the Muslim nations of the Middle East and in Central Asia, today’s areas of greatest conflict."

"The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States drew widespread sympathy abroad. But as the survey shows, that sympathy has dwindled in the publics of several countries, testing even the support of traditional allies. Huge majorities in France and Germany, as well as Russia, oppose the use of force to depose President Saddam Hussein of Iraq."

"Even as Washington has inaugurated a global campaign to improve its image in Muslim countries in hopes of eroding support for terrorism, the poll found substantial support in many Muslim countries for the notion that violence is justifiable in defense of Islam."

"Madeleine Albright, the former U.S. secretary of state, called that result ‘‘absolutely stunning’’ and ‘‘very difficult to absorb.’’ Albright, who chairs the Pew Global Attitudes Project, said that ‘‘clearly, an awful lot of work needs to be done for us to understand Islam, and for Muslim nations to understand what we’re about.’’

"The notion of justifiable violence found the lowest level of support among the Muslims of Tanzania, Turkey and Uzbekistan, all below 20 percent."