IS CHINA RECOLONIZING AFRICA?

MORE DRAMATIC READINGS at Hot Air.

KIDNEY BLEGGING and kidney blogging.

I LOVE LIFE: Michael Totten reports from the top floor of Lebanon’s civil society. Excerpt:

Most Lebanese think the American and Israeli “realists” who want to negotiate with the Syrians are painfully naïve at best, and downright sinister at worst. There’s an old saying about the Damascus regime in Beirut: Assad starts the fire, sells the water, and never delivers. And Lebanese will never forget that Secretary of State James Baker green-lighted Syrian domination of Lebanon for completely unneeded “help” in ousting Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.

Like Bill Roggio, Bill Ardolino, Michael Yon, and the other independent bloggers, he relies on donations, so if you like his (or their) work, be sure to remember to make one.

A NEW INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHT — against religious defamation? When they start locking up imams who call for the murder of Jews, or call them “apes” — or even proposing that those imams be publicly criticized and ostracized — I’ll believe they’re serious.

In the meantime, I’ve got a different candidate.

UPDATE: More here from Ilya Somin. “In addition, the US and other liberal democracies should consider denying funds to the UN Human Rights Council (which is a strong supporter of the Defamation of Religion resolution, among other attacks on freedom of speech) and other international bodies that promote new international law norms that undermine freedom of speech and other civil liberties. The democracies of the developed world provide these bodies with the lion’s share of their funding, and the power of the purse can be used to curb their depradations, even if it can’t end them completely.”

GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE: “The Bush administration has agreed to provide House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with regular access to an Air Force passenger jet, but the two sides are negotiating whether she will get the big aircraft she wants and who she may take as passengers, according to congressional and administration sources. . . . The defense source, who asked not to be named, termed her request ‘carte blanche,’ saying she wanted a plane that could carry an entourage just like President Bush, who flies on Air Force One, and Vice President Dick Cheney, who also always flies on military planes.” Well, she is third in the line of succession, but you don’t need an entourage for that. Dennis Hastert used a commuter-sized jet.

UPDATE: A reader recommends the C-20, an Air Force variant of the Gulfstream III. “It has the range for non stop San Fran to DC, and is faster than a big jet on less fuel.” Looks nice to me, though it does produce something like 10,000 lbs of C0₂ per hour. Still, that’s a lot less than the jet that Pelosi actually wants, I guess. My reader continues: “Of course it will carry fewer staff, and has only one flight attendant.” Quel horreur! But leadership demands sacrifices, especially if we are to save the planet from the scourge of global warming.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Further thoughts from Rich Karlgaard.

MORE: Some greenhouse perspective:

The typical American is responsible for 10 tons of CO2 emissions annually through their direct energy use of home, cars and air travel, and about 24 tons of CO2 including their purchases, activities and the other services we all share throughout the economy.

By comparison, a Gulf Stream III business jet (10-12 passenger) from New York to Los Angeles will emit around 31 tons of CO2 during the 6 hour flight.

And remember, that’s the small jet, not the much bigger one that Pelosi wants. Flying commercial, of course, is far more greenhouse-friendly. According to this calculator from British Airways, a one-way one-passenger flight from Washington, DC to San Francisco (roughly the same length, though a bit shorter) would produce 0.44 tonnes (0.485 tons) of C0_2. Even travelling with an “entourage” you’re way ahead. Jets full of the hoi polloi aren’t as pleasant, but they’re much more efficient. Fill the Gulfstream up with people who actually need to travel, of course, and you’re doing about as well as the commercial airliner in terms of efficiency, which is why I’m okay on that, but when you get to the bigger planes you’re clearly way, way behind — and if you fill them up with cronies and campaign contributors just because you’ve got extra seats, you aren’t really making things better.

MORE: Weirdly, Josh Marshall writes:

After the piece ran in the Times, it came out the Denny Hastert had had just the same use of Air Force jets since 9/11. The difference is that the plane Hastert used won’t fly cross-country without refueling. Here’s the Times at the story again today. It’s basically a rehash. But they again fail to mention this salient point, which more or less exposes the whole story as bogus.

But actually the story does mention that point quite clearly:

Mr. Hastert used an Air Force commuter-type jet to travel to and from his district. Mr. Hastert gained the access for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, attacks. Previously, the House speaker, who is second in the line of succession to the presidency, used commercial flights for such trips.

Mrs. Pelosi wants a larger aircraft that can fly to her home district of San Francisco nonstop. She also wants to be able to ferry other members of the congressional delegation, family members and her staff.

Hastert had a commuter jet. Pelosi wants a bigger one, partly for nonstop range and partly to accommodate an “entourage.” That seems clear to me, and to others — it’s why my reader recommended the long-range C20, above, a commuter-sized jet that won’t accommodate an entourage. Meanwhile, here’s another bit from the story:

The congressional source said the speaker’s office requested an Air Force plane to take her to a weekend Democratic retreat in Williamsburg, but the Pentagon declined.

The source said Mr. Hastert on one occasion used an Air Force plane for such an event. The Air Force later determined it was a mistake, and such flights were not repeated.

The source said the Pentagon will likely give in to Mrs. Pelosi’s requests for a large plane and travel entourage, given her and Mr. Murtha’s power over defense spending.

Pelosi seems to want to establish herself as a sort of Junior President. This seems unwise to me, and it’s certainly bad for Hillary — why vote for the first woman President if we’ve already got one?

STILL MORE: Here’s another story:

Republicans are taking issue with the size of the plane Pelosi has requested. Pelosi had asked for access to a C-32 plane, a military version of the Boeing 757-200. . . .

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, flew in a small commuter-sized jet. Pelosi and her aides say that because her congressional district is in California, her security would require a larger plane that can fly coast to coast without refueling.

“It’s not a question of size, it’s a question of distance,” Pelosi said Wednesday. “We want an aircraft that can reach California.”

Navy Cmdr. Jefrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday that Pelosi would be offered “shuttle service for no more than 10 passengers between Washington and San Francisco only based on aircraft availability.”

“This does not guarantee nonstop transport,” Gordon said.

Demanding nonstop service seems a bit much. That’s certainly hard for the rest of us to get, in this hub-and-spoke era. And the C-20 above seems to have the range she wants, it’s just not as big as a large commercial airliner — and, really, why should it be?

EVEN MORE: Thuggishness from Murtha:

Late Wednesday afternoon, one of Pelosi’s closest allies in the House, Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., chairman of the key Appropriations Committee subcommittee on defense, told CNN that the Pentagon was making “a mistake” by leaking information unfavorable to the speaker “since she decides on the allocations for the Department of Defense.”

Nice little Army you got there. Shame if something was to happen to it. However, this story has a lot more detail. It suggests that the C-20 is iffy for coast-to-coast flights, but that the C-37 (basically a military Gulfstream V) is what the Pentagon was offering:

There are four types of planes available at the 89th Airlift wing, at nearby Andrews Air Force Base  the C-20 Hastert once used, C-21s which are even smaller than the C-20 and thus not able to fly nonstop to San Francisco, and the fabled C-32.

There is also the C-37A — a military version of the Gulf Stream 5, which is about the same size as the C-20, but is able to fly nonstop to California. One military source who asked not to be identified says that it may be that Pelosi and her aides were shown a C-37A and didn’t understand that it was different and more potent than a C-20, since they look so similar.

Would Pelosi be willing to use a smaller plane than the lavish C-32 as long as it could fly coast to coast?

“Yes,” said a Pelosi aide.

Problem solved! Though the Gulfstream V will still make the greenhouse talk ring a bit hollower, I should think.

TERRY MORAN: “If a Republican candidate teamed up with a right-wing blogger who spewed this kind of venom, how would people react?”

UPDATE: Rand Simberg defends the blogosphere.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A lot of the lefty bloggers are up in arms that this has become a scandal. (The desperation is apparent in posts like this one, especially when you follow the links back and compare the actual posts with Marcotte’s blogging). I suspect that this is because a lot of them would like to join the establishment, and now fear that their prior anti-establishment rantings will get in the way. It’ll be interesting to see if there’s more Pandagon-like airbrushing of blog archives over the next few weeks. Meanwhile, other Presidential candidates would be well advised to spend a bit more time poking through the archives of any bloggers they think about hiring. There’s nothing really wrong with cursing or overwrought blogging in itself, but the standards for political operatives are different. And, as the Pat Buchanan / Larry Pratt business years ago demonstrated, candidates are held responsible for what these people do and say. Traditionally, people who want to rise in the ranks of political operatives have had to be careful about their behavior; this applies to bloggers who want to do that, too.

As Jay Reding says, “Predictably, the left-wing blogosphere has gone nuts over the piece. Like it or not, Ms. Marcotte may have the right to free speech, and no one is arguing that she should be censored. However, what she says is incendiary, derogatory, and bigoted. Had she treated Islam the way she treats Catholicism, she’d be widely ostracized.”

Ann Althouse observes: “All you bloggers seeking political jobs should expect the same … and more. After this new dustup, your prospective employers should check to make sure there are no usefully discrediting quotes, and you may never get the job.” She’s not so sure that keeping the blogosphere, and professional campaign posts, separate is such a bad thing.

A.C. Kleinheider: “I would caution John Edward’s against bowing to the advice that those around him are no doubt giving him: that these bloggers are liabilities and political dynamite that needs defusing. Yes, the conventional wisdom among the political elite will be that these bloggers are liabilities. It won’t always be however. If new media and blogging is something you want to embrace, you must go whole hog or not at all.” I don’t think that Edwards should fire them either; presumably he hired them because of their blogging, after all, and it’s unfair to fire them for the same reason. It’s a campaign — he’s taking criticism for their views, but if he believes in the views he should keep them on. You always get criticism in campaigns. This will be an interesting test of Edwards’ backbone.

Further thoughts on the lefty blogosphere’s conniptions here.

MORE: I agree with Conn Carroll: “If Edwards understood what he was doing when he hired Marcotte, he must follow the advice of Bowers and Wilbur. When Edwards hired Marcotte he signed up to a hard hitting unapologetic movement, a movement whose rhetoric is, shall we say, not always appreciated in the mainstream. If he backs off the ethos now, he can kiss their support away forever.”

And if he didn’t understand what he was doing, then this raises some questions about his future personnel decisions.

More thoughts here. And IowaHawk has got the papers.

A LOOK AT THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT: I haven’t read Lance Hill’s book on the subject, but I have a story of my own. About ten years ago, we had Kathleen Cleaver speak at the law school and lots of folks from the black community came. During the Q&A, one older black minister stood up and said that the right to bear arms had been the most important constitutional right during the Civil Rights era and told a similar story to the one here. Many of my colleagues were surprised. I wasn’t, because I had read the work of Robert Cottrol and Ray Diamond.

BAD NEWS FOR THE RIAA:

Debbie Foster, the RIAA file sharing defendent who notoriously took on the organization after it went after her for copyright infringement, has won some amount of the legal fees [see update below] she seeks from the RIAA after having their case against her dismissed last summer.

This is a significant development; the landmark case could have dramatic repercussions for the RIAA’s legal campaign against file sharers, since a precedent now exists for the RIAA to compensate wrongfully-sued defendants for their legal costs.

(VIA BoingBoing). Plus, Steve Jobs wants to abolish DRM.

TRANSPARENCY: In Tennessee, a proposal to make the legislature subject to the Open Records law, Tennessee’s equivalent of FOIA. It’s a good idea, and Congress should make itself subject to FOIA, too!

A NEW LOOK AT THE NEW DEAL, from Arnold Kling and Brad DeLong.

HOROLOGIUM IS BACK.

MINE YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

EUGENE VOLOKH OFFERS FREE LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING ADVICE to Tennessee Rep. Rob Briley.

THE MPAA WILL PROBABLY BLAME PIRACY for declining movie attendance, but this Zogby poll suggests an alternative explanation: the movies suck:

High ticket prices (30%) and a dislike for the movie selections (30%) are the top reasons given for falling movie attendance – 13% said they don’t like the crowds in the theater. Those age 18-24 are most likely to complain about costly tickets – nearly half (46%) said high ticket prices have kept them away from the theater. Among older adults, dissatisfaction with the film selections is the main deterrent – 46% of those age 65 or older said this.

More than a third (37%) of respondents said they go to the movies fewer than six times per year – 21% said they don’t even make it to the movies once a year. Overall, 10% said they never go at all.

Upside: If the movies are bad, nobody will pirate them! To these complaints, I’d add ridiculously overhyped sound: It’s more like an arcade game than a movie, most of the time.

MORE ON THE ARKIN AFFAIR, from StrategyPage.

UPDATE: William Arkin’s fire and brimstone world. And a reader emails:

It’s strange to see the media circling the wagons around William Arkin as he keeps digging his “American troops should be more grateful” hole. Can you imagine the Washington Post of the NY Times applauding free speech if a Southern white male claimed African-Americans should appreciate that they aren’t slaves?

Of course, the MSM effectively agreed to censorship when Muslims objected to the publication of the Prophet cartoons, so I guess it just depends on whose ox is being gored.

Free speech is speech that doesn’t offend people you’re afraid of.

HACKER PRACTICE ATTACKS: “Hackers briefly overwhelmed at least three of the 13 computers that help manage global computer traffic Tuesday in one of the most significant attacks against the Internet since 2002.”

OKAY, I’VE BEEN TRYING TO COME UP with something to say about the astronaut story besides “WHAT THE %$*#?” and I’ve pretty much failed. Ann Althouse had the best title with “When Astronauts Attack.” But leave it to Jim Treacher to come through with something I hadn’t thought of: A poll.

Meanwhile, Dr. Sanity opines: “This story makes me glad I don’t do psychological consulting for NASA anymore.”

And John Tierney looks on the bright side: “Miracle of miracles, people are talking about the space shuttle! . . . The only way to get the public to pay for a manned mission to Mars, I’ve argued is to turn it into a long-running reality TV show, with a cast of astronauts carefully chosen to maximize romance and ratings. ” Perhaps it’s all a cunning plan. . . .

THE ORBITAL DEBRIS PROBLEM has gotten much worse. A while back, Rob Merges and I suggested a Sindell-like market share liability scheme for space debris, in which nations would contribute to a compensation fund in proportion to their contribution to the problem. This idea has gotten some support in the academic literature, but we haven’t seen much movement among the spacefaring nations.

MIKE BLOOMBERG’S FIREARMS STRAW PURCHASES are under investigation by the ATF, according to a letter from the Department of Justice.

CORPORATE JETS LEAVING MIAMI after the Super Bowl.

MARK BOWDEN on hunting down Abu Sayyaf.

MORE ON THE KEITH HENSON ARREST, at the Free Keith Henson blog.

EX POST HILARITY from Tom Maguire, who continues his all-Libby all-the time coverage.

YUM! Sheets of meat, grown from stem cells.