ARTHUR CHRENKOFF ROUNDS UP GOOD NEWS FROM THE MUSLIM WORLD — and there’s a lot more of it than you might think from reading Western media where the focus is almost entirely on the Muslim world as a problem.

JOHNNY DOLLAR GOES TO THE TRANSCRIPTS to see if Fox News allows criticism of the Bush Administration. Shockingly, the anwer is yes!

Meanwhile, Kos responds to criticism over the press-pass incident.

THIS WEEK’S CARNIVAL OF THE VANITIES is up.

STOP BITCHING, START A REVOLUTION: Evan Coyne Maloney was at the inaugural anti-Bush demonstrations, and has a new video.

THE MUDVILLE GAZETTE: “On the other hand, to give credit where due, no one covers the insurgent side of the war quite like the AP.”

IN THE MAIL: Craig Shirley’s new book, Reagan’s Revolution: The Untold Story of the Campaign that Started it All. I haven’t read it, but Joe Trippi likes it: “It’s a must-read to understand the movement that has put President Bush in the Oval Office for a second term, what drives that movement, and why President Bush will implement an aggressive plan to achieve his goals. For Democrats it is a must-read because the book provides an object lesson on how a party thought to be void of ideas, moribund, and on life support 29 years ago, rose up and changed course and is now defining the debate at home and abroad.”

And how do I know this? Because somebody (Shirley’s publicist, I think) posted the review, along with some others, in the Amazon comments. Smart promotion.

UPDATE: A Bush-Reagan comparison here, saved from the NYT’s editorial wastebasket through the magic of the blog.

ANOTHER UPDATE: You can see Trippi interviewing Shirley here.

THE CLUB FOR GROWTH has a Social Security reform blog.

HOWARD KURTZ, MAGGIE GALLAGHER AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Over at GlennReynolds.com.

UPDATE: Gallagher got money from the Clinton Administration, too.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I still think that this is true, though:

I think that guild-mindedness and political slant is a much bigger problem for the press than institutional conflicts — and I suspect that that’s one reason why the press spends so much time talking about the latter while piously (and bogusly) claiming freedom from the former.

Some things don’t change.

TSUNAMI UPDATE: The death toll has hit 280,000, and we also learn this: “In Indonesia’s worst-hit Aceh province more than 1,000 bodies a day are still being recovered.”

Jeez. I don’t have words, really. (Via Tim Blair.)

CONFIRMATIONBLOGGING isn’t a big thing here at InstaPundit. But Legal Affairs is hosting a debate on Gonzales’ confirmation over at their site. Remember, this isn’t an exclusive relationship — you can read other people! [What, it’s like “friends, with benefits?” — Ed. Er, sort of, I guess.]

UPDATE: RedState has launched a confirmation blog.

MORE ON HUGO CHAVEZ’S TIES TO TERRORISM: Why am I not surprised to be reading this?

HERE’S ANOTHER BLOW to any hopes CBS might have had that the Thornburgh Report would put RatherGate behind it:

A document examiner involved in the flawed “60 Minutes Wednesday” report on George W. Bush’s National Guard service claims that he was defamed and his reputation damaged by the recent report from an independent review panel that investigated the show’s reporting practices, E&P has learned.

Marcel Matley, one of four document experts consulted by CBS News while reporting its Sept. 8, 2004, report on Bush, is demanding a slew of corrections in the report, which was issued earlier this month. In an interview with E&P, he referred to the report’s treatment of him as “defamation.” . . .

He said the report has already hurt his professional reputation, claiming it was mentioned last week during his appearance in a Modesto, Calif., courtroom on a probate case. “Someone brought it up that I was the one who made the mistake in the ’60 Minutes’ case,” he said. “I’ve already had this thrown at me.”

Matley told E&P he had yet to hear back from CBS or Thornburgh about the e-mail. “They have not acknowledged my existence,” he declared. “They have not even replied.”

Jeez.

ARMED SELF-DEFENSE WORKS:

ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) — \When two men walked into a popular country store outside Atlanta, announced a holdup and fired a shot, owners Bobby and Gloria Doster never hesitated. The pair pulled out their own pistols and opened fire.

The armed suspect and his partner were killed. The Dosters won’t be charged, according to local officials, because they were acting in self-defense.

“I just started shooting,” said Gloria Doster, 56. “I was trying to blow his brains out is what I was trying to do.” . . .

Police arrived about five minutes after receiving Gloria Doster’s call; the suspects died a short time later at a hospital.

The bloodshed, nevertheless, startled Gloria Doster, who has been around guns all her life, and has used them for target shooting. “But I never figured I’d have to use them on anybody,” she said.

The practice worked. And note that the police also would have been too late to save the victims, if they had needed help.

UPDATE: Read this story, sent by reader George Johns, too.

PROBLEMS AT THE FBI are a long-running InstaPundit topic of interest, but this is still a big deal:

A federal jury today awarded nearly $6.6 million in damages to former Chicago police Officer Steven Manning, finding two veteran FBI agents framed him for a Cook County murder that put him on Death Row.

The jury also held that one of the FBI agents also framed Manning in a Missouri kidnapping case. Manning spent 14 years in prison before both convictions were overturned and the prosecutions were dropped.

The damages could go even higher. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly, who presided over the six-week trial, is yet to rule on whether the United States shares responsibility with the two agents for malicious prosecutions.

“It’s a long, long way from Death Row to complete vindication,” Manning said after the verdict.

Then there’s this bit:

Both Miller and Buchan remain with the bureau, according to FBI spokeswoman Cynthia Yates.

In closing arguments Jan. 11, a federal prosecutor lauded both Buchan and Miller as dedicated, law-abiding FBI agents.

In a fateful decision, the FBI used a notorious informant named Tommy Dye to try to elicit evidence about the Pellegrino murder while Dye and Manning were incarcerated in Cook County Jail.

Dye asserted he had captured a confession by Manning on a hidden recorder, but when nothing was audible, he claimed that the confession came during a two-second inaudible portion of the recording.

Sounds like he should work for CBS. But this is no joking matter, and (1) it’s appalling that someone would introduce such dubious evidence; and (2) this sort of thing needs to be punished so that it doesn’t happen again. No doubt the agents would claim that the defendant is really guilty, and that the evidence is “fake but accurate,” but that doesn’t wash.

The question is whether this represents a systemic problem at the FBI, and I fear that it does. Can Porter Goss go there next?

If he does, he should listen to Dave Kopel and Paul Blackman on what ought to be done.

JEFF JARVIS ON THE HOMELESS:

And the real issue isn’t homelessness. It’s insanity. The laws in this country make it impossible to commit and help even the obviously and often the dangerously insane.

I say that One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is as much at fault as any politician, for it made the institution frightening and the people who run it bad guys.

Yes. Lakeshore Park, the lovely place where I sometimes walk or jog, is actually on the grounds of the former Eastern State Mental Hospital, which housed thousands of people. There are still a few left in a couple of buildings, but what used to be a place to care for mentally ill folks is now a complex of baseball fields, putting greens, and jogging trails. The people who once would have been cared for there are now, for the most part, on their own.

My wife thinks that the de-institutionalization movement was a dreadful mistake, and that a lot of people have suffered as a result. And they’re not just the people who were deinstitutionalized, either, though they suffer the most. Her documentary on the Lillelid murders notes that the ringleader of the killers was discharged from a mental hospital after 11 days — actually a fairly long stay by today’s standards — despite a clear recognition that she was dangerous to herself and others; if she’d had proper treatment, the family that she and her confederates murdered would still be alive. (My wife felt strongly enough about the importance of this point that it’s in the trailer). Ironically, the killer is finally getting mental health treatment in an institutional setting, and she’s doing better than she was before. As my wife notes, prisons have become the mental hospitals for many people now — it’s just too bad that the price of an admission ticket is sometimes murder.

I think that Jeff’s right about the One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest effect. And mental hospitals often aren’t — and weren’t — nice places to be (though they weren’t all hellholes, either: I recently talked with a woman who had spent six weeks in a Virginia state hospital back in the 1960s who said it was one of the most pleasant times in her life, as “they had a swimming pool, the food was good, and nobody bothered you”).

On the streets, lots of people bother you. Though we tend to talk about the homeless in terms of their bothering others — and, God knows, they do — the experience is usually pretty bad for them, too.

UPDATE: Reader Rosemary Bright emails:

Glenn, as someone who was in the graduate school of social work at the University of Texas in the ’80’s I saw the beginnings of the deinstitutional movement. Under the laws that were passed there was a time frame the state had to meet on getting the mentally retarded and mentally ill out of the state institutions. The day-to-day workers were against it, there weren’t enough group homes for folks to go to (neighborhoods went up in arms when a home was being converted in their area). It was clear to me, someone new to the area, that there were a lot of people who needed to stay where they were.

I’ve heard numbers that some 60% of the “homeless” on the street are mentally ill. Anyone who’s dealt with the mentally ill know they will get off their medications. Family members of these people are usually worn out from caring for them, worrying about them and are not equipped at all. It was the wrong kind of reform to take.

I got out of the whole profession … realized I was a capitalist at heart! But that whole concept of how to deal with mental illness desperately needs to be revisited.

De-institutionalization let states save money while looking compassionate. It was irresistible. But the more difficult (and expensive) follow-through was highly resistible. Reader Ben Bauman emails:

Many of the mentally ill need constant care and do not get it. My brother was one of these people. His mental instability constantly got him in trouble and the only way he could have a normal life was when he was in mental institutional care. He would only receive this when he would get in trouble and went to jail. We could not get him institutionalized through the courts. So, he roamed the country (primarily CA and NV) until he would get in trouble or some one would harm him (therefore requiring medical care). Normally he would be released after 6 months in a mental institution because he was “healthy” enough to make it on his own (survive). Well, this went on for years until he finally passed away last year at the age of 40. The system really did kill him. I thank god for the Salvation Army for all the time they spent trying to help him, but the evil people out there took advantage of him constantly. Again, I think your wife is right on this issue from my own personal experience.

I’m sorry to hear that. Not all the homeless are mentally ill, of course, but a lot are — and they’re usually the ones who have, and cause, the most serious problems.

ANOTHER UPDATE: More here.

MORE: George Roper emails:

Dear Mr. Reynolds, first, a great posting on de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. I started working in a mental hospital in 1969 as a recreation therapist. At the time I started working, we had well over 2000 patients in a hospital that could comfortably hold only 1800 or so. By the time I finished my graduate degree in 1973, the population was down to about 800 or so. The majority of the some 1500 clients were placed in nursing homes, with family or in sheltered homes. But, they didn’t stay. The mental health field adopted the idea of short term treatment for even the severely disturbed as the ultimate goal and psychiatry/psychology became a game of numbers. Legally, in Texas at least, you cannot be committed for treatment unless A. you are mentally ill and B. as a result of that illness you are a clear danger to yourself or others. So, no matter how disturbed you are, if you aren’t a danger under current law, you cannot be forced into treatment. Unfortunately, by the time a patient is patently dangerous, it may be too late.

The massive release of mentally ill patients between the late 1960’s and mid 1970’s unfortunately did not include the concept of required treatment. Because many of the anti-psychotic medications produce a significant decrease in libido, many patients quit taking their medications in favor of an active sex life. Many patients, left to their own devices quit taking their medications because they just didn’t remember. Many families quit “forcing” their family to take their medication because it was just too hard, too much work. The results are evident across the country.

We have collectively done a great disservice to those who, through no fault of their own, have severe mental illness and are not getting active treatment.

One example of the ignoring of mental illness and its resulting tragedies is the issue of suicide which I address in my blog here: Link

Judith Lown writes:

I worked for a year in a post-doc internship at a facility for the homeless mentally ill in San Diego. Not only are the vast majority of the homeless
mentally ill, most of them have long drug and alcohol histories. It’s really impossible to sort out self-medication from fried brain due to drugs. But after a
while, it’s possible to guess pretty accurately what drug is implicated in the variety of fried brain you’re seeing.

San Diego was the early capital of meth manufacture and use and we saw a lot of meth induced psychosis–some in people who were previously productive middle class citizens. I don’t have an answer. I left clinical psychology.
But the homeless mentally ill were my favorite clients. Beat the middle class navel gazers by a mile.

Ouch.

STILL MORE: Background and history on what went wrong, here.

I’VE NEVER BEEN A FAN of the Patriot Act, though I have to admit that its operations so far haven’t proven as dire as I feared. But this column by Walter Williams is worth reading, and I agree with this suggestion:

Government officials have always wanted open access to our financial records; the war against terrorism gives them the cover to do so. Here’s what might be proof: How about an amendment to the Patriot Act whereby any information gathered under its provisions cannot be used in a court of law unless it can be tied to terrorist activity? I’m guessing that few politicians and law enforcement authorities would agree to such an amendment.

Most vital to the conduct of any war, including a war on terrorism, is a vibrant, flexible economy. There’s a possibility that massive volumes of security regulations and massive security expenditures can weaken our economy and thereby threaten national security. Al-Qaeda type terrorism is not our only national security threat either now or in the future. Keep in mind it was our productive capacity that ultimately won the Cold War.

I think that all of these special “terrorism” provisions — many of which have already been invoked by prosecutors in mundane criminal cases — should in fact be limited to cases involving terrorism, and I think that government officials who abuse their authority ought to be subject to punishment, and to lawsuits. And it’s very hard for me to take “antiterrorism” legislation lacking such safeguards seriously.

CHINA TARGETS SPACE: My TechCentralStation column is up.

UPDATE: Rand Simberg sends this link to a column he wrote last year on China. He thinks they’re no threat until they start taking a more entrepreneurial approach. I actually hope that they do, for reasons explained in my column.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Read this column by Mark Whittington, too. He’s hoping for a space race.

INTERESTING NEW POLL RESULTS from Iraq. The Iraqis’ views on security are especially interesting: “75% of Iraqis say security where they live is either ‘good’ or ‘average.’ Not exactly the impression you would get from the American press.”

UPDATE: Be sure to check the new Iraqi website, Friends of Democracy, regularly.

ANOTHER OPED PAYOLA SCANDAL? What are these people thinking?

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey says that Drudge misrepresents the Gallagher story, and that it’s not another Armstrong Williams case.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Gallagher responds here:

I was not paid to promote marriage. I was paid to produce particular research and writing products (articles, brochures, presentations), which I produced. My lifelong experience in marriage research, public education and advocacy is the reason HHS hired me.

But the real truth is that it never occurred to me. On reflection, I think Howard is right. I should have disclosed a government contract when I later wrote about the Bush marriage initiative. I would have, if I had remembered it. My apologies to my readers.

Seems like a tempest in a teapot to me. I think we’re in the midst of another ethical feeding-frenzy, of the sort discussed at length here, in which conduct that wouldn’t have raised an eyebrow six months ago, or six months from now, is likely to get a lot of attention.

MORE: Scandal or non-scandal, LaShawn Barber sees it as an opportunity!

STILL MORE: Reader David Jones emails:

The old adage applies: Circumstances alter cases. This was not “payola” and as you observe only has the appearance of being such because of the proximity in time to the Armstrong W debacle. Of course, those who are opposed to Maggie’s strong defense of marriage will make the most of it to discredit her. She deserves better.

I’m actually not very familiar with her “strong defense of marriage,” and suspect that I might well disagree with it. But while it would have been better for her to disclose this, it seems quite different from the Williams case. And you can’t disclose everything — or, if you do, it becomes a joke, like the “do not eat” warning label on the iPod Shuffle. Some sense of proportion is called for.

I suspect, though, that there are a lot of people on the left and right who couldn’t pass the test that’s set for Gallagher. Which is why I think this furor will die down soon.

MORE PHOTOBLOGGING FROM IRAQ, by Lance Frizzell.

PROF. BAINBRIDGE has a stinginess update.

TIM BLAIR is back.

YES, ROBERT BYRD is an awkward choice. Fortunately for him, the media won’t make a big deal of this, as they might in other circumstances.

UPDATE: Others, however, are doing so.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Related posts here and here and here. It’s a good thing that Democrats are doing this, because if Republicans were doing it it would be evidence of racism at the highest levels of American society.

MORE: Still more here.

STILL MORE: Roger Simon has further thoughts.

YOU KNOW, I wish I could cancel a few days’ classes, hop a plane, and go Kayaking in Death Valley. And don’t just follow that link, but check out Ken Layne’s entire Highways West blog.

It’s like Arizona Highways Magazine, er, except it’s not just about Arizona, and it’s a blog, not a magazine. And it’s by Ken Layne.

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE about the Wisconsin electoral-fraud story, the Badger Blog Alliance is all over it.

Meanwhile, over at GlennReynolds.com, I call for action to remedy voter fraud now, so that it can be implemented in time for 2008.

UPDATE: Here’s a report on vote fraud in East St. Louis.