John Russo | Zennie Interview | Russo On Oakland, Obama VP, Raiders

I met with Oakland's elected City Attorney and my friend John Russo the day after election day to talk about his unopposed win for a third term, how Oakland has changed, Oakland Politics and the District Three Council race, who Senator Obama should pick as his VP, what Russo's is proudest of with the evolution of his office, and the talks between the City of Oakland and the Oakland Raiders.

Russo explains that the talks are between the Raiders and the Oakland / Alameda County Joint Powers Authority and that they're going well. He also confirmed that Raiders Manager of The General Partner Al Davis is not in good health and has not attended all of the meeting. As to the possibility that the Raiders would get a new stadium, he said no, but they're in agreement on the matters of concern to the Raiders.

Given what I know from trying to bring the 2005 Super Bowl to Oakland (we lost to Jacksonville), that means we should expect to see an upgraded Coliseum at some point in the future.

What was surprising news was that the Raiders were the party that initiated the talks, and not the City of Oakland or The County of Alameda. I personally feel that's a signal of the Raiders new willingness to work with the City and stay in Oakland.

Also, we talk about why he ran unopposed and how Oakland's political landscape has changed.

The Constitution has finally prevailed

Yesterday, the Constitution won. In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court said that prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay have the right to have their cases heard in US courts, granting them the writ of habeas corpus. Writing for the majority in Boumediene v. Bush, Justice Anthony Kennedy said, "Liberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system they are reconciled within the framework of the law. The Framers decided that habeas corpus, a right of first importance, must be a part of that framework, a part of that law."

President Bush was none too happy with the decision, saying, while on a trip in Italy, "First of all it's a Supreme Court decision. We will abide by the court's decision. It was a deeply divided court and I strongly agree with those who dissented. The dissent was based upon those serious concerns about U.S. national security. Congress and the administration worked very carefully on ... a piece of legislation that set the appropriate procedures in place as to how to deal with the detainees." He went on to say that his Administration would study the ruling, " ... with this in mind, to determine whether or not additional legislation might be appropriate so we can safely say to the American people: 'We're doing everything we can to protect you.'"

I am not surprised at all that Bush is pissed. It's hard to keep your citizens under the blanket of fear when the courts expose the "enemies," like Omad Khadr, to the light of day. But it's a huge victory for America when the Court allows the rest of world to see that our system of checks and balances can, even at the last stop, prevail. The Constitution was bruised and battered along its way through, being hit hard by both the executive and legislative branches. It then was dealt near death blows by the courts along its way to the highest court in the land. But the highest court saved it and proved that our system does, indeed, work. This was a victory not only for the Constitution, but for the framework of our government detailed therein.

Writing for the opposition and speaking from the bench about his opposition, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the decision "... will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." I'm not sure how. These prisoners have been held at Gitmo for years. Were any of them truly guilty, their fellow combatants would not get the message from this ruling that they could get caught, extradited to the US, have a short, easy confinement, get a fair day in a lenient US court, be set free, and return to the battlefield. That's just not the way it works and not the way it will be seen in the world. The message it does send the world, however, is that we are finally taking our role as human rights leaders seriously.

To read the Opinion and the Dissent for yourself, go here: FindLaw.com

Cross posted from The Constitution has finally prevailed at AshPolitics on WordPress.

NATIONAL PRESS CLUB NUTS - HOSTING LARRY SINCLAIR?!?

In the latest example of Jumping The Shark, The National Press Club, once a place for leaders to meet the press, lowers itself to less-than-curb-level and into the garbage, giving a platform to Larry Sinclair, a person who lives in Texas but lied about it, has lied about his association with Senator Obama, took a lie detector test, FAILED IT, and yet is still being given a platform by the NPC.

Now that's nuts. Sign the FiredogLake petition here.

Calll the NPC and ask for the President at 202-662-7500 now!

Sex And The City - I'm Lame Because I've Not Seen It Yet

Ok. That's how I feel. Hey, I love Sex and The City for a lot of reasons. I've just not seen the movie yet. Why? I don't know. But I do feel lame for having not seen the movie. At any rate, here's a great video on the movie, complete with scenes:

Protect Free Speech, Including Hate Speech

I just saw this article in the New York Times reporting on how Canadians crack down on the use of "hate speech" that's commonly heard in the United States.

Does that mean we're less advanced as a society? I think not. My personal view is that while I totally hate any kind of "hate speech", hearing it in a digital society gives us a true view of our country and causes others to put pressure on the "haters" to stop what they're doing.
http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif
For example, I remember when a certain NY Times writer confused me as being two different Black men in consecutive columns. Valleywag picked up on that, and the racism that was evident.

The result was an apology from the writer.

Besides, we would not know how stupid Michelle Malkin could be without free speech!

Baby Mama? Malkin and Megyn slander Michelle Obama

It’s become fashionable for GOP surrogates to smear and try to irk Mrs. Obama, but with all the effort going in to finding mud to fling at her it’s stunning that FOX would support such an overt, transparent lie so close on the heels of the terrorist fist jab fiasco. Make no mistake, the network supported it as part of their ongoing hunt for ratings, which in turn determines how much you charge your advertisers.

But will SNUGGLE and other advertisers want to be affiliated with bashing married moms? Is that consistent with Snuggle's cuddly-bear image: funding slanderous attack ads? Tell SNUGGLE what you think; let them know you're going to use other products if they continue to advertise on a mean network that pretends to present fair and balanced news.

www.snuggle.com/data/registration/feedback.aspx

read more | digg story

Overt Racism and Sexism at Fox News

Want to be amazed at just how overtly racist and sexist Fox News can be? Go to Daily Kos and check out this post: Fox Smears Michelle Obama with Sexist/Racist Slur. You'll get the breakdown and the screenshot, which I won't reproduce here out of respect for their having it first. What I will do is share the caption they showed, with Michelle Malkin hosting, under Michelle Obama on screen:

"Outraged Liberals: Stop Picking On Obama's Baby Mama!"

Are you kidding me? Even for Fox Noise, this is dipping way deep into the racist and sexist pit. If you're as offended as I, write to Fox (yourcomments@foxnews.com) and to the FCC to register your disgust.