In case I didn’t get the message, my voice vanished. Then when I still didn’t stop working, the cold decided to slam me a bit harder. If I feel better, I’ll blog later today.

Otherwise, today’s a chicken soup day and I’ll see y’all tomorrow.

In the meantime, three quick news items:

1. On Wednesday, the 9th Circuit temporarily stayed the earlier decision by Judge Virginia Phillips to ban enforcement of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. LA Times and NY Times have the story.

2. A remarkable and little noticed speech given earlier this month by retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has Stevens talking smack about Antonin Scalia, praising Anthony Kennedy, and naming the decision that he said was one of the Supremes’ least favorite rulings: Harmelin v. Michigan, which found that a life sentence for possession of 672 grams of cocaine was constitutional.

Sentencing Law and Policy has more.

3. Three months ago, Michael Anthony Green was released from a Texas prison after spending 27 years behind bars for a crime that newly tested DNA evidence suggested he did not commit.

On Wednesday, the court went one step further and found Green actually innocent of the crime that sent him to prison for almost three decades. The Houston Chronicle has the story.

Tuesday night, on the kick-off night of their Violence Prevention Conference, the California Wellness Foundation awarded their annual California Peace Prize to three remarkable people who practice “results-oriented violence prevention.” (The prize includes a $25,000 cash award for each recipient.)

The first of the three awards went to someone whose selection I cheered particularly loudly—namely Aquil Basheer who is, to quote the Wellness people, “a renowned gang intervention practitioner who uses his street experience to educate youth and professionals who regularly deal with gang violence in Los Angeles.”

More specifically, Aquil is the executive director of Maximum Force Enterprises, which also runs a Professional Community Intervention Training Institute (PCITI), in partnership with the Chicago School of Professional Psychology, was recently adopted as a model for gang intervention by the Los Angeles City Council.

He travels all over the country consulting with other cities and communities about ways that the community members can reclaim their neighborhoods from violence, while at the same time, helping high risk kids to help transform their communities by transforming themselves.

As if that weren’t enough, Aquil is a nationally known expert in threat assessment and crisis prevention, a former Black Panther, a 10th degree blackbelt listed in the Who’s Who of Martial Arts, an inspiring instructor and public speaker and….well, go read the rest of his bio. (He’s also a great dad, a devoted husband, and makes a terrific friend..)

As a side note, it is interesting to know that Aquil’s own dad was the first African American firefighter in the history of Los Angeles.

When he accepted the award, his speech turned evangelistic near the end, as he talked about the work he and many others in the room were doing:

“Individually, we might make inroads, but collectively we cannot be stopped..” he shouted at one point, and the audience in the ballroom of the Hollywood Renaissance Hotel applauded approvingly.

Aquil was loaded with such preacherly one-liners.

“Knowledge is power, but it’s enthusiasm that flips the switch.”

“If you’ve been looking up, it’s time to get up!”

When he finished, the be-suited dinner crowd whooped and hollered, clearly happy to be there to celebrate him.

The remaining Peace awards went to two people who also seemed quite outstanding:

The first was Perla Flores, who is a passionate advocate for woman who are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking. Her work with women from the underserved communities such as migrant women in Morgan Hill and surrounding areas has become a model for such work in many regions around the state.

She was followed by Sammy Nunez, a former gang member who did time in Folsom prison for attempted murder, but who now runs Fathers and Families of San Joaquin, a nationally known community based organization that works to turn around the lives of at-risk youth, particularly young fathers, in the Stockton area.

Violence prevention advocates and experts had flown in from all over the country to honor the three—and will remain for the remainder of the conference to discuss the thorny problems each of the honorees represent.

(More on all that tomorrow.)

NOTE: Light blogging today in that, as noted above, I’m at the Wellness Foundation Conference until Wednesday night.

More soon, as there is much to report.

As of today, Tuesday, October 19, new LA County Probation Chief Donald Blevins has been on the job exactly six months. So, when I got the report over the weekend that last month a couple of large gang and/or race-related brawls had broken out in the county’s probation camps and juvenile halls, it did not bode well for the hoped for change in the county’s hideously broken juvenile probation system.

I supposed we should be cheered that millions of dollars and scores of employees are no longer being regularly “misplaced.”

And nearly 100 new mental health and health-care professionals will reportedly soon be hired, which is a good thing.

But in the camps and the juvenile halls that are the heart of the matter, (since that’s where the system meets the kids it serves)— progress is depressingly hard to locate.

CAN ONE GUY REALLY DO IT ALL?

Last summer, many felt that federal help (in the form of a consent decree) was necessary in order to clean up and transform LA County’s spectacularly broken juvenile probation system. However, Chief Blevins wanted a chance to fix the horrible mess on his own—a desire that was understandable.

However, six months in, there are unsettling indications that the dysfunctional and damaging environment that exists in the county’s worst juvenile facilities, remains largely unaltered.

One cannot help but wonder if, despite the best of intentions, this swamp of an agency isn’t too much for any one guy (and his team) to reboot—top to bottom– without the tools that a federal consent decree provides.

The report of the brawls is one more disquieting sign of the magnitude of the problem:

PLUS CA CHANGE, PLUS C’EST LA MÊME CHOSE?

As every expert will tell you, when kids are sentenced to juvenile probation camps or juvenile halls, our best chance to keep those kids from coming back to juvenile lock up, is to have smart programs that emphasize rehabilitation, not punishment. The idea is for a kid to emerge better from these county-enforced time-outs. Away from the pressures of street violence, gang influence and whatever family dysfunction there may be, camp should be a safe place where firm boundaries, a disciplined atmosphere, daily eduction, productive activities, and mentoring allows a kid who is going in the wrong direction, to correct his or her flight path, and maybe do a little growing up.

The state of Missouri has famously pioneered a model that accomplishes this goal brilliantly.

Unfortunately, according to anecdotal evidence and statistics both, most of LA County’s juvenile facilities are still stuck in the punishment-and-violence end of the juvenile corrections continuum.

This is from the aforementioned report issued from the office of Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas:

On Sunday September 5, 2010, a fight broke out between approximately 30 minors at Camp Francis Scobee, one of the camps in the Challenger Memorial Youth Center, located in Lancaster. {My note: The Challenger group is the cluster of camps that is the focus of a humongous lawsuit brought by the ACLU for some of its “Dickensian” conditions.] The melee had racial overtones and included fights between African American and Latino minors. The fighting resulted in injuries to both minors and staff members.

The following week, on Tuesday September 14, 2010, there was another fight, this time at the Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall in the San Fernando Valley. According to the Probation Department, there were 16 minors involved in fighting between African Americans and Latinos. Fortunately, there were no injuries.

The report goes on to say that there have been 15 such group clashes between out-of-control fist-swinging kids at the probation camps thus far in 2010, six of them Camp Scobee alone. Most of the clashes had racial overtones, most appeared to be gang-related.

In addition there were 15 other “major disturbances” at the county’s juvenile Halls—11 of those melees at Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall. (More commonly called “Sylmar” because of its location, Barry J. Nidorf has long been known to be the most out of control of the county’s juvenile halls.)

In nearly all instances, the fights have resulted in injuries to both kids and staff.

Any way you cut it, that’s a lot of brawls.

Sylmar alone has had more than one brawl a month. And those are the big, multi-kid fights where injuries resulted. In other words, these are the fights that we know about.

Stories of staff unable or unwilling to control gang and race-related fighting in the camps and halls have been reported for years by the teenage probationers and adult volunteers who spent time in the facilities. I posted a fragment of one such story in February of this year, two months before Chief Blevins took over.

Here’s an excerpt:

“Eastlake [Juvenile Hall] is pretty strict,” [17-year-old David] said. But Sylmar was a whole different matter, he said. “At Sylmar there’s a lot of crooked stuff going on.”

I asked him to explain. “Oh, for one thing, certain staff will open doors to cells so that guys can come inside the cell and beat up some other guy, while the staff walks down the hall to make a phone call.” He said, the staff member came back to stop things “before it got too bloody.”

I asked if these were just rumors, or did he know first hand. He knew first hand, David said, because on three different occasions, he had been on either the giving or the receiving end of such staff-sanctioned beating.

The other thing was, he said, “some of the staff brings in drugs, if you have the money to pay for ‘em.”

What kind of drugs? I wanted to know.

“Weed,” he said. “And coke. And cigarettes and lighters.

“But you got to have the money,” David said. “If you have the money, you can get most anything.”

So, have things changed under the new regime? September’s stats suggest not—or at least not much.

Once Chief Blevins had the chance to get his feet under him we had hoped for….well…. progress. Yes, he’s turning a supertanker, but if we don’t see a few ripples on the water, we will start to assume that the thing ain’t turning.

“This is just not good,” Supervisor Ridley-Thomas told me on the phone Monday night. “These incidents let us know that [probation} is still not managing the environment well at all. We’re not seeing improvement. We’re not yet seeing an attempt to manage it.”

SO WHAT TO DO?

Ridley-Thomas has written a motion asking for a report on these and other sorts of violent activities, to be delivered in 30 days. (The motion will be introduced at the Sups meeting on Tuesday morning.)

That’s a start.

It’s essential that the supervisors, and outside advocates, and the press keep the pressure on so that the urgency of the matter is always out front and visible.

(Urgency and real-no-kidding accountability are precisely the elements not present in the past with probation. The chronic lack thereof is what got us into this mess.)

HERE’S THE DEAL: On January 19, 2011, Donald BlevIns will have been on the job for nine months to the day. If we’ve not seen measurable progress by then we will understand that more aggressive help is needed, and there will be another call for federal intervention.

And this time the call will be much, much louder.

On Sunday the LA Times portrayed Meg Whitman as positively loaded with law enforcement and firefighter endorsements, while at the same time suggesting that Jerry Brown had a few wimpy little public safety endorsements at most.

What’s up with that?

This skewed picture emerged in an “Election 2010″ article, written by reporter Catherine Saillant, about the potential influence of the police and firefighters unions and organizations on the California governor’s race. In the print edition of the paper, the article was titled, “These Allies Could Boost Whitman.”

Here are the first two ‘graphs of the piece:

Meg Whitman has repeatedly said she exempts police and firefighters from her plan to switch state workers from pensions to 401(k)-style retirements because they have dangerous jobs.** But analysts say the GOP gubernatorial nominee’s stance is also a shrewd political move.

Police and firefighter unions hold tremendous power in Sacramento and can use their cash and muscle to help a candidate get elected. They pay for hard-hitting TV ads that play up their role as the guardians of public safety. They turn out at campaign events to hector anyone who proposes to mess with their pay and benefits.

Saillant went on to quote experts who said that the cops, firefighters, and other law enforcement groups are perceived as our heroes. (and rightly so). Thus if Whitman has taken some heat due to her agreement to exempt state law enforcement personnel and firefighters from pension cuts, she was likely making a savvy move because, all the fire and cop unions who now endorse her will prove to be valuable assets by putting money and might behind her. And most importantly, they will lend to her their collective heroic and tough-on public-safety image. (Or words to that effect.)

Then the unions who endorse Whitman were listed: The LAPD union, (LAPPL) and the California Statewide Law Enforcement Assn., “a union of California Highway Patrol officers, firefighters and other public safety officials.”

Plus, there was a quote from Ron Cottingham, president of the Police Officers Research Assn. of California, “the largest group representing sworn officers,” which was positioned in such a way that most readers would assume that Cottingham’s organization also endorsed Whitman.

Finally, near the very end of the article, Saillant wrote that: “Brown has secured endorsements from other law enforcement groups and a police chiefs group.” That was it. End of story. And since none of those “groups” were deemed important enough to name, one was left to conclude that, whatever the organizations were, they were small potatoes compared to tough-on-crime Meg Whitman’s big, bad (but heroic) endorsements.

THERE IS ONLY ONE TEENSY-WEENSY PROBLEM with the article’s depiction of the candidates and their public safety supporters.

It is utterly misleading and…well…..kinda false.

Although both candidates have a reasonable list of public safety endorsements, including Whitman’s endorsement by the LAPPL (which carries a lot of weight in So Cal), when the lists are laid out side by side, one sees quickly that more of the state’s largest law enforcement and fire organizations support……..Jerry Brown.

Ron Cottington’s aforementioned 62,000 member organization, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, supports—not Whitman—but Brown.

The 30,000 member California Firefighters Organization supports Brown with a vengeance.

And the 800 lb. gorilla when it comes to exerting influence on California state politics, the CCPOA—the prison guards’ union—supports Jerry (not-your-father’s-moonbeam-anymore) Brown.

(I can’t actually find any firefighters’ group that endorses Whitman, but maybe I’m missing something.)

Moreover, Brown has performed this trick of getting endorsements without promising pension-reduction exemptions.

Below you will find listed the main dueling public safety endorsements according to the candidate’s own websites. (I left out individual endorsements, like LA County Sheriff Lee Baca and former LAPD Chief Bill Bratton, who also endorse Brown, and the Kern County and Sacramento County sheriffs who endorse Whitman.)

(By the way, I noticed that that Brown only lists his “key” endorsements whereas Whitman lists everyone she once passed on the street who said they were voting for her. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

WHITMAN ENDORSEMENTS

Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) - represents the more than 9,900 sworn officers of the Los Angeles Police Department.

California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA) – represents 7,000 public safety professionals

California Peace Officers’ Association (CPOA) – represents more than 3,000 law enforcement officers working in local, state and federal agencies.

California Narcotic Officers’ Association – provides training for 7,000 officer/members

BROWN ENDORSEMENTS

California Police Chiefs Association (Cal-Chiefs)
– represents nearly all the police leadership throughout the state.

California Professional Firefighters - represents more than 30,000 firefighters

Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)- represents 62,000 officers and 890 local public safety associations.

California Coalition of Law Enforcement Associations (CCLEA) – represents 80,000 officers statewide.

California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) – represents 30,000 correctional peace officers

I don’t mean to be critical of Ms. Salliant, whom I assume is a nice person and usually an excellent reporter. But when an election is as close as this one, it would be helpful if the information given to voters by the biggest newspaper in the state was…..you know….correct.

**NOTE: Whitman’s campaign got in touch to correctly remind me that she does not guarantee to exempt state public safety workers from all pension reform, but only from her platform’s 401(k) strategy.

The LA Times reported over the weekend that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has communicated in a letter to the DEA and other law enforcement agencies that, even if the voters of the state pass Proposition 19, he intends to “vigorously enforce” federal marijuana laws against Californians.

So let me get it straight: in this era of limited resources, overcrowded jails and prisons running at double-capacity, the U.S. AG is going to go after the pot smokers? (And growers and sellers.) All this in defiance of the will of the California voters, should Prop. 19 pass?

Yeah, that works.

(NOTE TO MR. HOLDER: I don’t know if you and your DEA friends have noticed, but crystal meth is destroying lives at a staggering clip in states like Montana, Texas, Idaho, Arkansas and Missouri, and that little issue might be a better use of your time and money, than weed.)

Furthermore, where are all the states rights, small government, free market conservatives on this?

The always excellent Doug Berman, over at Sentencing, Law and Policy, put it better than I can. He said:

I am disappointed, but not really surprised, that this story has yet to generate backlash or even comment from the usual suspects on the right who are so eager and usually so quick to attack every supposed “big government” move by the Obama Administration. For reasons I am still struggling to fully understand, the traditional conservative voices on the right who gush about individual liberty and free markets, and who love to bash big government and the Obama Administration, seem to flee from their purported principles when the liberty and free markets at issue involving growing and smoking a weed.

(Here’s Berman’s much earlier post called Making the Conservative Case for Ending Pot Prohibition on California.)

TRUTANICH: “THEY’RE FRIGHTENED THAT I’M STRONG”

Hillel Aron at Neon Tommy did a terrific and slightly horrifying interview with Carmen Trutanich. Here are a few choices moments of the exchange:

Why do you think there’s so much resistance to this idea of a grand jury on the City Council?

I don’t know, to be honest with you. There shouldn’t be any resistance. I am their lawyer. I cannot investigate my own client. I don’t know if they get that, I don’t know if they understand that.

They think that you’re going to investigate them?

Yeah. They’re afraid. Accountability must be…I tell you, you want to investigate me? Have at it. I hope that we hold each other and ourselves accountable for everything we do in public life. That’s what transparency’s all about. And if you’ve been transparent in how you’ve conducted your public life, even if I could investigate you, why would it matter? But I can’t. I can’t. So whatever blowback I’m getting is from lack of understanding or just, I don’t care and I don’t want to run the risk.

Do you think you’ve done anything to encourage this view that you would investigate them?

No. I think they’re frightened that I’m strong. I’m not a weeping willow. I’m smart in terms of how I run this office. We’re effective. We’re thorough. When you have someone who’s competent and in a position of authority, it tends to frighten some people.

AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE SUBJECT OF TRUTANICH AND WEED…..

If you haven’t already, be sure to read Steve Lopez’s account of how, at our City Attorney’s urging, he plans to take a hit for the team. Or several hits— of pot—as it turns out.

Part 1 ran on Saturday, Part 2 will be Wednesday. (It would very very wrong to miss either.)

FRONTLINE ASKS IF TEXAS EXECUTED AN INNOCENT MAN

In its Tuesday night season premier, PBS’s Frontline takes on the Todd Willingham case.

Did Texas execute an innocent man? Several controversial death penalty cases are currently under examination in Texas and in other states, but it’s the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham — convicted for the arson deaths of his three young children — that’s now at the center of the national debate. With unique access to those closest to the case, FRONTLINE examines the Willingham conviction in light of new science that raises doubts about whether the fire at the center of the case was really arson at all. The film meticulously examines the evidence used to convict Willingham, provides an in-depth portrait of those most impacted by the case, and explores the explosive implications of the execution of a possibly innocent man.

Here’s some back story on the case.

OKAY, YOUR HONOR, SO I GET IT THAT AS A JUROR ONE CANNOT TALK TO ANYBODY ABOUT THE CASE—BUT WHAT ABOUT BLOGGING?

Monday’s NY Times has the story of Bruce Slutsky, who began chronicling his jury duty experience in Queens on his blog. He began on Sept. 16, the first day he had to report. He wrote about the jury room and chatted about how he was called for a civil case.

He blogged about his experiences every day thereafter until law professor John Clark of the University of Texas stumbled upon Slutsky’s blog—and notified the court.

Read the rest of the intriguing tale here. (Spoiler: the judge and lawyers did not dismiss him….but there’s more.)

THE BEST “IT GETS BETTER” VIDEO TO DATE

Deeply affected by the recent string of suicides by teenage boys, on Tuesday Fort Worth City Council Member, Joel Burns, told his own personal story about being badly bullied—breaking down as he attempted to talk about his own near suicide at age 13, a story he’d never told anyone, he said. Then, after sharing some of his life’s subsequent joys, the councilman delivered an eloquent plea to kids struggling with their sexual identity.

“”To those who are feeling very alone tonight, please know that I understand how you feel, that things will get easier,” Burns said. “Please stick around to make those happy memories for yourself. It may not seem like it tonight, but they will…..”

FYI: Burns became the first openly gay candidate elected to public office in Tarrant County, Texas, when he won a special election for a seat on the Fort Worth City Council in 2007. He was reelected in 2009

SATURDAY, CBS 48 HOURS DOES THE BRUCE LISKER STORY—SO, HOW WILL JERRY BROWN REACT?

Attorney and CBS News Correspondent Erin Moriarty spent two-years on the Bruce Lisker story that is airing Saturday night on CBS’s 48 Hours. (You remember Lisker. He’s the guy who was released from prison last year after spending 26 years locked-up for the murder of his mother. He was released when a federal judge ruled that the evidence used to convict him was either questionable, cooked, or utterly false. )

From the look of the trailer, she’s got all the pieces—including the fact that Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown may try to put Lisker back into prison on a technicality, however he’s waiting until after the election to decide. (Not good, Jerry. Not good at all.)

Let’s hope this high profile treatment of the Lisker case persuades or embarrasses Brown into doing the right thing, sooner rather than later.

9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ORDERS SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO TO BE HUMANE (GEE. BUMMER, JOE)

Evidently the 9th Circuit thought some kind of adherence to the….you know….U.S. Constitution (for example, the 8th Amendment) ought to be a part of the Maricopa sheriff’s job description.

Colorlines has the story on the court’s Wednesday decision. Here’s how it opens.

On Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling by a lower court that charged Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio with mistreatment of detainees in his jails for serving them spoiled food and neglecting their health.

Arpaio’s cruelty toward his inmates is legendary. Tent cities, physical abuse and hard labor, pink underwear, chain gangs—he’s imposed all of these sadistic measures on his prisoners. In 2008, the ACLU took Arpaio to court, arguing that because of his well-documented abuses, his jails necessitated federal oversight.

U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake ruled in October 2008 that Arpaio broke the law by failing to meet basic requirements in food quality and housing conditions for inmates. Arpaio appealed the ruling….

AND SPEAKING OF SHERIFFS, IT SEEMS THAT THE LA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT HAS CAUGHT UP WITH THE RAPE KIT BACKLOG

LAObserved has that story.

JOE DOMANICK TELLS HOW ARNOLD TRIED AND FAILED TO REFORM CALIFORNIA’S DYSFUNCTIONAL PRISON STRUCTURE—A CAUTIONARY TALE FOR THE NEXT GOVERNOR

As Arnold Schwarzenegger finishes his last weeks in office, my pal Joe Domanick looks at how Arnold, more than nearly all of his predecessors, truly wanted to reform the state’s correctional system. But he was roundly defeated by his inability to out maneuver special interests (CCPOA), and/or the mindless “tough on crime” mania that still rules in Sacramento.

Will the next governor do any better?

Meg Whitman recites “tough on crime” as her mantra, and shows zero inclination toward reform.

Brown actually talks about corrections reform, but, with his CCPOA endorsement, will he have the guts to go for it? (One can always hope.)

CDCR LAUNCHES INMATE LOCATOR (FINALLY)

If you’ve never had a friend or loved-one locked up, this may seem like nothing to you. But for family members of prisoners it’s a big deal. The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department has long had an excellent inmate locator on its website. But, for years, the California Department of Corrections had nada. Thursday all that changed.

As the CDCR’s Matthew Cate said in Thursday’s press release:

“Inmates who stay connected with loved ones are often more motivated to change their behavior and lead a crime-free life,” said CDCR Secretary Matthew Cate. “This new tool will make it more convenient for the public to locate, write and visit incarcerated family members and friends.”

Here’s the link to the locator itself. I just test drove it. It works well.

CALIFORNIA BEGINS TO FOCUS ON STOPPING PRISON RAPE

In the Daily News, human rights advocate, Lovisa Stannow, writes about how California is finally admitting that they have to—and can—do something about chronic and traumatizing prison rape problem.

JACK LONDON’S SAN FRANSISCO STORIES & THE NEW HOMELESSNESS

When you’re about to be homeless it’s tough to edit a book. (Hell, it’s hard enough even when your rent or mortgage is all paid up.)

But when Rodger Jacobs (whom we’ve been following in the series, The New Homeless) was in the midst of being evicted and wondering if he and his longtime girlfriend would soon be on the street, he did the last bit of editing and wrote the preface on a charming collection of Jack London stories that was just released this week.

Well done, Rodger!

A BLOGGER EXPOSES OUTSIZED COP AND FIREFIGHTER SALARIES IN EL SEGUNDO AND GETS HARASSED BY GUYS WITH GUNS AND BADGES

An El Segundo homeowner (who also happens to have a blog) did a little post-Bell scandal digging and learned that, in his own town—which has few criminals or fires and no murders last year—cops earn an average of $175,000, firefighters $210,000. He put this info on his blog—-and then things got ugly.

Paul Teetor LA Weekly’s Paul Teetor has the story— (and the back-up research for the blogger’s claims.)

AND…BECAUSE IT WOULD BE WRONG TO GO A DAY WITHOUT AT LEAST ONE MORE WHOREGATE STORY, I GIVE YOU:

….MEGHAN DAUM, WHO HAS A HARD TIME GETTING TOO WORKED UP OVER THIS MONTH’S EDITION OF “GAFFES GONE WILD”

Here’s a clip from the heart of Daum’s amusing and dead on essay:

From ambulance-chasing lawyers to corporate shills to just about anyone who’s ever tried to forge a career in advertising, public relations or the entertainment industry, the concept of whoredom is now less about selling your body than about selling your soul. Heidi Fleiss’ ring of old-fashioned whores might have made her a “Million Dollar Madam,” but Enron’s empire of modern-day whores — most of them men — was a far bigger, and arguably sleazier, operation than that.

Happy Friday.

THURSDAY UPDATE: Looks like not everyone at NOW considers the term “political whore,” off limits.

On Thursday, California NOW President Parry Bellasalma evidently told TPM, when asked, that “Meg Whitman could be described as ‘a political whore.’ Yes, that’s an accurate statement.”

Alrighty, then.

Okay, yes, I realize this whole Whoregate thing is the deadest of horses, but it is interesting, in part, because of what it reveals on all sides about political machinations.

And, also, it broaches the subject of the power contained in language.

Plus, it’s been good gossip. And human beings love to gossip. It’s part of how we tell our stories.

Okay, so the latest wrinkle in Whoregate occurred on Wednesday when the LA Times and other media outlets reported that although the California chapter of the National Organization for Women had endorsed Jerry Brown, the momma organization of NOW had not offered any such endorsement.

Until Wednesday—at which time NOW issued a statement giving Brown their support, but making clear that calling women whores—even in a political context—was not one teensy bit okay. It was hate speech, said NOW on its website. Furthermore, it was reported by the LA Times (and a string of news outlets repeated that story) that Now had “demanded” that Brown fire the staffer who said the W word.

So, what would Brown do? I wondered. Obviously, he’d shown a strong disinclination to fire whomever was the guilty party, claiming that the recording was too indistinct to know who said what. (Dude, you were there. You don’t need the freaking recording.)

And then there is the fact that, upon closer inspection, it has been widely observed that the voice in question belongs to a woman, not a man—and a woman who may very likely be Jerry Brown’s wife, Anne.

Obviously, it is not overly realistic to expect the candidate to fire his feminist, lawyer, former business executive wife, for using the W word.

Thus, what did NOW think Brown should do if it was indeed, his wife, who dropped the W bomb?

Weirdly, nobody seemed to have asked this question of NOW.

I decided to call the organization’s DC office to find out what they thought. I reached NOW’s press secretary, a smart and articulate woman named Mai Shiozaki.

Shiozaki had been fielding calls all day and it was a bit after 8 p.m. EST, when I found her, so I got right down to business.

If it was Jerry’s wife who called Whitman a political whore, did NOW honestly expect him to ankle the missus?

Shiozaki sighed. “We’re not asking for the aide to be fired,” she said. “That’s not at all what we meant. We think that if someone on either campaign says it in the future, they should be fired.” Mostly , she said, “we felt this should have been a teachable moment.”

“I’m all for teachable moments,” I said.

Shiozaki and I talked further about the spells that words can cast, for ill and for good, and what did or did not constitute hate speech. (I am more liberal on the topic than she is.) She admitted that she didn’t think the remark was gender specific in the situation with the Brown aide, or in the case of the remark made by Whitman campaign chair, former governor, Pete Wilson, when he called a large swath of the US Congress whores.

But it was still not okay, she said, not at all.

Before we rang off, Shiozaki said she’d send me a new and revised statement of NOW’s position on the matter.

The statement came a few minutes later. It read as follows:

NOW calls on Brown to take a pledge to, from now on, fire any member of his staff who uses this word or any hate speech against women. We also expect Whitman to take the same pledge. What happened last week was a teachable moment, and what we have all come to agree is that the “W” word is offensive, destructive and should be retired for good.

“Retired for good.” Okay, yes. Perfect, I wrote her back. The word should be mothballed. There are other ways to talk about hypocrisy that do not carry the same harmful freight.

Go, teachable moments!

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO APPEAL DON’T ASK DECISION—BUT QUICKLY

The Obama Administration is in a tricky situation. Obama wants to be rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. But, now a federal judge in California has ordered an immediate cessation of the policy. Should the DOD comply (which will infuriate large portions of Congress) or should they defend the policy in a higher court?

The AP describes how the administration intends to divide that particular baby:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Wednesday of “enormous consequences” for men and women in uniform if a judge’s order abruptly allowing gays to serve openly in the military is allowed to stand.

The Obama administration may well ask for a stay of the ruling while it appeals. Justice Department officials worked behind the scenes on their response into Wednesday night with no word on when there would be an announcement. The uncertainty of the next step left gay-rights activists as well as the military in limbo over the status of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law.

A day after a federal judge in California ordered the Pentagon to cease enforcing the law, Gates told reporters traveling with him in Europe that repeal should be a question for Congress – and only after the Pentagon completes a study of the impact of lifting the ban, which is due Dec. 1.

Read the rest.

AND WLA JOINS ALL CHILEANS IN THEIR UTTER JOY AT THE RESCUE OF THE MINERS—MILAGROS X 33!

Monday, October 11, was National Coming Out day, the date when LGBTs and their friends, families and co-workers (which basically includes about all of us) celebrate and support the courage to be one’s self, and not feel the need to hide one’s sexual identity. (In addition to the day, all this week is devoted to the same affirmation and celebration.)

The week feels particularly crucial in the light of the string of suicides last month by American teenagers—two only 13-years old– who each killed themselves after repeated and prolonged anti-gay bullying and harassment.

Another young man killed himself early this month. Zach Harrington of Norman Oklahoma was 19, and a talented musician.

As the month has worn on, there were more awful statistics.

Neon Tommy’s editor-in-chief has written a good story about some of the ways social media is playing a part in the newly urgent activism:

Here is how her story opens:

Twenty-seven-year-old Los Angeles resident Vince Wong received several requests to change his Facebook profile picture to show he’s part of an emerging movement.

It had nothing to do with legalizing marijuana nor did it address “whoregate” and “maidgate,” the latest scandals in California’s gubernatorial race.

Instead, he was asked this past week to “donate” his main profile picture to National Coming Out Day by colorizing it and including the word “Out.”

Wong, who is gay, joined 20 to 30 of his friends who changed their profile pictures in the past week.

They did so as part of “Count Me Out,” a grassroots social media movement tied to National Coming Out Day 2010. Social media users are encouraged to change their profile pictures on social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube and FourSquare to a tinted rainbow hue with the word “Out” or “Ally.” The campaign is designed to show support for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities.

National Coming Out Day, Oct. 11, and the remainder of the week, comes after a slew of teen suicides have brought teen bullying and harassment into the national dialogue…..

Read the rest.

AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE TOPIC: Is there a reasons why the Washington Post thought October 11 was a swell time to run a creepily anti-gay Op Ed?

To wit:

There is an abundance of evidence that homosexuals experience higher rates of mental health problems in general, including depression. However, there is no empirical evidence to link this with society’s general disapproval of homosexual conduct.

Thanks WaPo, for providing a platform for such rubbish. Your compassion, sensitivity and general sense of civic responsibility is genuinely astounding.

Late last month, the PAC made up of the LAPD union—the LAPPL-–and The California State Law Enforcement Assn, gave $450,000 to media buys for Meg Whitman.

Wednesday, post debate, the LA Times reports that the California Statewide Law Enforcement Assn. is now making another $800,000 in media buys for Whitman—totaling $1.25 million, to date.

Both organizations have the same political consultant, Don Novey, who was also the person who orchestrated the release of the now infamous accidental recording in which a Brown staffer calls Meg Whitman a political “whore.”

Novey was also reportedly responsible for the distribution of the error-filled “certified” transcript that attributed the remark to Brown.

The LA Times reports:

Brown spokesman Sterling Clifford said Whitman earned the endorsement by pandering to the group.

“Whitman began her campaign calling for the privatization of prisons and an end to the pension system as it now exists but conveniently went back on those pledges when asked about them by CSLEA,” Clifford told Capitol Weekly last month.”So the question now is, does Whitman believe she was wrong to propose privatizing prisons? Why the change of heart? How can voters trust that she won’t change her mind again?”

The endorsement by both organizations came after Whitman agreed to exempt law enforcement and firefighters from her proposed pension reform.

As a side note: Don Novey is the colorful fedora-wearing former president of the CCPOA, the prison guard’s union and is at present engaged in an exceptionally acrimonious fight with his successor at the union, Mike Jimenez, and with the union itself, which is suing him.

The CCPOA has endorsed Brown, whereas Novey has aligned himself strongly with Whitman.

Well, it wasn’t dull.

Brokaw was great. Whoever made the decision to ask him to moderate this puppy, did us a great favor.

Meg was much better prepped than in the past.

She also seemed to get a lot more face time, mainly because she grabbed it, and Jerry allowed her to do so. Should he have jumped in more?

Among Whitman’s better moments was her answer to the teachers’ union question that was asked of Brown. He bobbled it. She hit that one out of the park and sounded forceful on education reform.

Jerry came back to some degree on the topic. But she was much stronger.

Meg’s most effective zinger (which had the unfortunate disadvantage of not being accurate), was when she said, “You have been part of the war on jobs … for 40 years.” The line drew a startled round of spontaneous applause.

Jerry scored points when he said that he would start the budget process, not in January when the governor usually proposes his budget for the following fiscal year, but in November, right after he’s elected. That he’d get all 120 legislators in a room and basically get down to it.

Brown: You’ve got to get the legislature on board or nothing happens. (An applause line.)

This was a hit at Whitman since it was precisely the thing that Arnold failed to do, despite good intentions. It is thus far not at all clear that Whitman has the government craft in her repertoire to succeed any better.

Jerry’s statement about leading by example, also got him applause. (The topic came up in relation to Whitman ridiculing him for saying he would cut the staff in the governor’s office. Jerry parried the blow and struck back.)

After Meg had her good education moment, Jerry was good on immigration. He was clear, emotional and believable.

He was also good when Meg slammed him for not defending Prop. 8. There was no shilly-shallying. It’s been ruled as being in violation of the 14th Amendment to the constitution, he said, and he won’t have his office fight for it. Period. “When something is so fundamentally wrong….I’m not going to back it.”

On whoregate—which Brokaw handled well—Brown was appropriate in bringing up Whitman campaign manager Pete Wilson’s own “whore” remark, but Jerry could have sounded a bit more sincere with his apology.

On the other hand, it was exceptionally grating to watch Whitman making Homer Simpson noises when Brown said that, No, in fact he didn’t think that having his campaign staffer calling Whitman a political whore was the same as using the “N” word.

(Dispute it if you want, Meg, but be a grown up. Not a smirking high school girl.) Even the audience went into a bout of high murmuring at her response to the issue.

Whitman continues to hit jobs harder than Brown does.

On the other hand, Jerry was good at urging the defeat of prop 23. In addition to his pitch for a green future, he said that Whitman’s proposal creates “regulatory uncertainty” for business.

Jerry handled the crime and criminal justice questions capably, batting away Whitman’s soft-on-crime accusations.

Plus, speaking personally, it was good to see Jerry momentarily showing his reformer side on the subject:

“We need criminal justice reform,” he said.We need reentry, and we also need to be tough on crime.”

There was much about pensions.…and one more round of barbs about who would be the best cutter of government waste.

So, how do you think each did?

And, in the end, who won?