Here's all you need to know about mileage standards

Between the 1974 oil crunch and Ronald Reagan, the average efficiency of the US auto fleet increased 60%, and horsepower dropped slightly. Since then, horsepower has increased 60%, and fuel efficiency has dropped slightly.

When automobile manufacturers whine that better efficiency is impossible, think about where we would be now if all of the engineering genius that has gone into more power had continued to focus on less waste.

Oregon Politics: The rise of the radical center

The race to retire BushWeasel™ Gordon Smith from the US Senate next year just got much, much more interesting.

With the collapse of Bush's popularity in the Pacific Northwest, Smith has found himself in the excruciating position of straddling the yawning divide between an electorate wondering why Smith continues to support a deeply unpopular President, and a state Republican party that is second to none when it comes to vengeful wingnut politics. Smith's Senate seat is a top-tier Democratic victory next year, if the state Democrats can nominate a credible candidate. But amazingly, that hasn't been easy.

And here's where it gets wild.

The obvious choice is Peter DeFazio (OR-4), one of the best US Representatives that Oregon has produced in decades. But DeFazio has decided he would rather be a larger fish in a smaller pond, and is staying in the House. The two announced Democratic candidates, Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley, have considerably less public stature and, frankly, are considerably less exciting than DeFazio. Absent a stronger showing by state Democrats, and despite Smith's increasingly schizophrenic efforts to simultaneously cast himself as both a moderate and as a wingnut, it is conceivable that the $10 million that Smith has already committed to spend (roughly $5 per registered voter) could carry the day.

As my esteemed blogging colleague mcjoan mentioned in an excellent recent post (in which Senator Smith formally claims the Pacific Northwest eco-terrorist mantle of soon-to-be-former-Senator Larry Craig), former Republican John Frohnmayer has formally announced his intention to run for Smith's Senate seat, as a member of the Independent Party.

Frohnmayer is an interesting guy. A Vietnam vet with deep Oregon roots, impeccable Republican credentials, and advanced degrees in literature, divinity, and law, he was George Bush I's pick to head the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), where he promptly encountered the meatgrinder of the increasingly vicious (although, in retrospect, still relatively unsophisticated - did you ever think you'd get nostalgic about Bush I?) Republican noise machine. He attempted to pander to the wingnut right by forcing artists to swear to not use Federal funds for "obscene" art (the four NEA-funded artists who sued over this ridiculous bit of kabuki won hands down), but it was the era of Maplethorpe and crucifixes in urine-colored water and Frohnmayer was the designated fall guy for the manufactured outrage, finally getting fired in 1992. An articulate and ethical voice of moderate Republicanism, he's one of the better-known and best-liked politicians in the state (his brother David is even better known - he was a popular centrist state Attorney General for a decade, and his brutal defeat by the wingnut right telegraphed the new savagery of Republican politics in Oregon when he ran for Governor in 1992).

Now, this part is hard to explain to people who weren't living in the Pacific Northwest before 1985 or so. Briefly, this part of the country once tended to elect Senators and Representatives for life, and the post-war generation of regional politicians had reached dominant senior positions throughout Congress by the late 1970's (Larry Craig and Max Baucus are the last remnants of this regional tradition). For historical reasons going back nearly a century, the region has tended to vote as a block on issues relating to efficiently extracting money from the Federal government, assuring the Pacific Northwest of a phenomenal share of all of the military and public works handouts since the New Deal. What emerged from that pattern was a generation of regional politicians who were reasonably competent, reasonably honest, and reasonably non-partisan. You voted for the person you thought would do the best job. You did not vote on the basis of party affiliation. Those days are long gone, thanks to the relentless toxic spillover of the national Republican noise machine. But an entire generation of voters remembers that time, and they miss it.

For that cohort of voters, Frohnmayer represents everything that decent politics used to be, and could once again become, and Frohnmayer has wasted no time in driving that point home. During the press conference announcing his candidacy, Frohnmayer elegantly and unequivocally blasted his former political party and called for the George Bush's immediate impeachment. In doing so, he positioned himself to the left of the Democratic candidates for Senate, while simultaneously retaining his image as an articulate centrist.

The Independent Party of Oregon didn't exist a year ago. It started as a project of Oregon political activists who remember that simpler, saner time in regional politics. The thinking was that they could register a few tens of thousands of voters, run a couple of local candidates, and gradually start to influence the dominant narratives of the currently dysfunctional state political scene. Frohnmayer's decision to leave the Republicans and run as a card-carrying member of the Independent party is an unexpected high-profile windfall, with utterly unpredictable consequences.

The best part is that both Republicans and Democrats not only hate the idea of a Frohnmayer candidacy, but are convinced that he is simply a stalking horse for the other party, a fiendishly clever plot set in motion specifically to hurt them. Me, I think this is just Frohnmayer being Frohnmayer. But the fact is that right now he is far and away the most credible candidate in the race. It is impossible to say whether he will take more votes from the toxic Republican incumbent or the singularly uninteresting Democratic challengers, or if he can put together a coalition to win.

But it's going to be a really fun election season in Oregon.

My girlfriend, on hearing that Karl Rove is leaving to spend more time with his family

"Eww. That guy has a family?"

Totalitarianism, Harare to Washington

From BBC:

Mugabe approves surveillance law

Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe has approved a new law allowing the security services to intercept postal, internet and telephone communications.

The law also establishes a state-run communications monitoring centre.

Officials say the new law is meant to provide security and prevent crime but critics say it is aimed at stifling opposition to Mr Mugabe.

From NYT:

Broader Spying Authority Advances in Congress

A furious push by the White House to broaden its wiretapping authority appeared on the verge of victory on Friday night after the Senate approved a measure that would temporarily give the administration more latitude to eavesdrop without court warrants on foreign communications that it suspects may be tied to terrorism.

The House is expected to take up the White House-backed measure on Saturday morning before going into its summer recess.

Democratic leaders acknowledged that the bill would probably pass.

Democrats in both the House and the Senate failed to pass competing measures on Friday that would have included tougher judicial checks and oversight on the eavesdropping powers.

The White House and Congressional Republicans hailed the Senate vote as critical to plugging what they saw as dangerous gaps in the intelligence agencies’ ability to detect terrorist threats.

Nuclear weapons: Putin moves on

Well, so much for that quiet conversation over cookies in Kennebunkport:

Russia issues new missile threat

Russia has raised the idea of basing new missile forces in Kaliningrad, close to Poland and Lithuania.

First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov linked the possible move to US plans for a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Russia has already threatened to hit back by targeting missiles at Europe.

Mr Ivanov said there would be no need to move extra forces to Kaliningrad if the US agreed to use Russian facilities instead of the Polish and Czech bases.

Russia says the US plans for a limited missile defence shield, including bases close to Russia's borders, represent a threat to its security.

It has proposed that the US should use a radar facility in Azerbaijan, and another installation currently being built in southern Russia.

Guliani, Climate, and New Jersey

New Jersey has taken the next step on reducing greenhouse gas emissions:

The New Jersey Legislature passed a bill yesterday that set ambitious goals for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from power plants, refineries, motor vehicles and other sources that contribute to global warming.

Business leaders expressed concerns about the bill's effect on energy costs and the state's competitiveness, but environmental advocates hailed it as pathbreaking, and Gov. Jon S. Corzine said he was ready to sign it into law.

Under the new law, greenhouse gas emissions generated by every aspect of the state's economy, not just electricity-generating stations, will have to drop about 13 percent, to 1990 levels, by 2020. The bill further requires that emissions be capped at 80 percent of 2006's levels by 2050.

A few other states have set emissions reduction goals, but none go as far into the future as New Jersey's. California, which passed a similar law earlier this year that was widely considered the toughest in the country, extends only to 2020.

That's good, right?

Well, not according to Guliani sidekick Jeff Holmstead:

Jeffrey R. Holmstead, the former chief of air and climate change programs at the federal Environmental Protection Agency and now head of the environmental strategies group at Bracewell & Giuliani, said that without a cap and trade program or specific regulations for emissions reductions, New Jersey's efforts were unlikely to be successful.

"Having spent a lot of years working on these issues, I can see the political appeal of doing these things", Mr. Holmstead said. "But to willy-nilly go out and set goals that can't be met, and assign another group to figure out how to get there, doesn't make any sense to me."

And what did Jeff Holmstead do before he became the voice of Guliani's law firm on all things environmental? Well, he comes to Guliani from his job as Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation at EPA, where he distinguished himself as a climate change denier and shameless propmoter of the cynical "Clear Skies" initiative to weaken the Clean Air Act. According to Mother Jones:

From 1993 until his appointment to the EPA, Holmstead worked at the Washington law firm Latham & Watkins, representing the American Farm Bureau Federation in a case against the EPA, as well as Montrose Chemical and the Alliance for Constructive Air Policy. According to his official White House bio, Holmstead's work at the law firm "included a number of environmental issues--including many arising under the Clean Air Act." In fact, Holmstead represented chemical companies and industry groups seeking looser pollution standards.

From 1989 to 1993, he served as associate counsel to President George H.W. Bush, advising him on environmental policy. Holmstead also served as an adjunct scholar for Citizens for the Environment, a libertarian group founded and funded by oil giants Charles and David Koch...

...When EPA scientists came up with data indicating that the administration's "Clear Skies" proposal would increase pollution, he reportedly replied, "How can we justify Clear Skies if this gets out?"

Heckuva job, Jeffie. It is past time for someone to call Guliani out on climate change issues. A sinking candidate can always use another anchor.

Warm and fuzzy military toys

Notice what is not being highlighted here: The routine, pervasive, and indiscriminate use of electronic warfare on the civilian population of Iraq. I got offered a cushy job at one point to design training materials for the EA-6B. I think I'd be having a hard time living with myself right now if I'd taken it.

Vietnam-era Navy plane takes aim at new enemy: Iraq's roadside bombs
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 12, 2007

ABOARD THE USS NIMITZ IN THE GULF: A secret aircraft that debuted in Vietnam and usually protects U.S. fighter jets has taken on a different and crucial task over Iraq — trying to stop the scourge of roadside bombs by jamming ground signals from mobile phones and garage door openers.

The EA-6B Prowler is thought to be one of the most effective U.S. weapons against the bombs, the biggest killer of American service members in Iraq. But no one can be sure: Even supporters say its effectiveness is hard to measure.

The aircraft debuted at the tail end of Vietnam and was used in Kosovo and the 1991 Gulf War, escorting U.S. attack jets while jamming military radios, hostile radars and air defense batteries aimed at them.

These days the Prowler focuses its jammers on smaller signals: those of mobile phones and garage door openers that are used to trigger roadside bombs in Iraq, said U.S. Navy Capt. David Woods, 49, of Ogden, Utah.

Often, it's hard to prove that a roadside bomb failed to explode because of Prowler jamming signals, Woods said. Still, he's confident the plane is making a difference against the bombs, which the military calls improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.

"When it's flying we have greater success and fewer IEDs going off," Woods said. "It's kind of an insurance policy."

Woods, the commander of Carrier Air Wing Eleven and one of the Navy's most experienced Prowler pilots, says few people understand the EA-6B's mission, which is to control the electromagnetic spectrum so allies can use it - but not enemies.

The Prowler and its electronic warfare system is so valuable it has never been exported — even to close allies. Details about the training of crew members are secret.

The Prowler is a homely plane, hung with torpedo-shaped pods and covered in tumor-like bumps packed with a bewildering array of computers, transmitters, antennae and receivers that can analyze and block ground transmissions. A sinister-looking prong protruding from its nose is a refueling nozzle.

The EA-6B's bulbous nose cradles a crew of four: a pilot and three electronic countermeasures officers who operate the jamming gear.

Outside experts say the Prowler remains the world's most effective electronic warfare aircraft, but the aging U.S. fleet of about 120 aircraft is overworked.

Still, the Pentagon considers the Prowler critical enough to ensure no U.S. aircraft carrier heads to battle without four or five. There are two squadrons now at sea in Mideast waters: one aboard the carrier USS John C. Stennis, the other aboard the Nimitz.

Another two land-based Prowler squadrons are in Iraq, Woods said.

In 1999, Serb air defenses shot down an Air Force F-117 stealth fighter probably because it strayed too far from the jamming beam of its Prowler escort, said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Washington-based Lexington Institute.

On the Nimitz, which operated inside the Persian Gulf in recent days, Prowlers could be seen screaming off the deck along with packs of F/A-18 Hornet fighters, heading to Iraqi airspace.

Over Iraq, the fighters fly patterns above U.S. ground operations, waiting to be called to drop 500-pound bombs, if needed.

The Prowlers fly between 20,000 and 30,000 feet, Woods said, steering invisible waves of electromagnetic signals over areas where insurgent bombs may be waiting for U.S. convoys.

According to outside experts, receivers inside the Prowler's tail collect radio signals from the ground, which are analyzed by an on-board computer. As threats are identified, the plane's crew floods the area with electromagnetic energy that blocks the signal.

The plane's computer is loaded with a "threat library" of hostile signals, which are used to match those on the ground. The jammers can block transmissions across wide range of frequencies, everything from TV and radio signals to mobile phones and the Internet.

But its jamming gear has no effect on bombs that are hard-wired to their triggers, Woods said.

The Pentagon is spending $9 billion to replace the Prowler with 90 Boeing F/A-18 fighters outfitted with electronic warfare gear. The first two, known as the EA-18G Growler, are already being tested.

The first Growlers are supposed to begin service by 2009 and replace the carrier-based Prowler squadrons by 2013. The job is expected to eventually be taken over by unmanned planes.

Woods is among a rare breed with more than 1,000 aircraft carrier landings — nearly all with the Prowler. He says he'll miss the plane he's been flying since 1984.

"It's like an old girlfriend or your first car," he said, pointing to a photo of the plane on the wall of his quarters on the Nimitz. "There are things about it you just can't replace."

ooch.

Read it and weep - this is what passes for deep thought on foreign policy in the Bush Administration.

When reality becomes South Park

Pentagon Confirms It Sought To Build A 'Gay Bomb'
Hank Plante

(CBS 5) BERKELEY A Berkeley watchdog organization that tracks military spending said it uncovered a strange U.S. military proposal to create a hormone bomb that could purportedly turn enemy soldiers into homosexuals and make them more interested in sex than fighting.

Pentagon officials on Friday confirmed to CBS 5 that military leaders had considered, and then subsquently rejected, building the so-called "Gay Bomb."

Edward Hammond, of Berkeley's Sunshine Project, had used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a copy of the proposal from the Air Force's Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio.

As part of a military effort to develop non-lethal weapons, the proposal suggested, "One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior."

The documents show the Air Force lab asked for $7.5 million to develop such a chemical weapon.

"The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a chemical that would cause enemy soliders to become gay, and to have their units break down because all their soldiers became irresistably attractive to one another," Hammond said after reviwing the documents.

"The notion was that a chemical that would probably be pleasant in the human body in low quantities could be identified, and by virtue of either breathing or having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soliders would become gay," explained Hammond.

Love Songs of the Jackals

Have you noticed how the right-hand, above the fold spot on the front page of the Wall Street Journal has suddenly become monopolized by puff pieces about Rupert Murdoch? Today's ode to the new master describes him thusly:

At all newspapers, owners have a say in broad editorial direction. Mr. Murdoch has a long history of being unusually aggressive, reflecting his roots as an old-fashioned press baron. From his earliest days, like some other newspaper proprietors of the last century, he ran his companies with his hands directly on the daily product, peppering reporters and editors with suggestions and criticisms.

In an interview in his New York office on Friday, the Australian-born magnate spoke openly about his hands-on style. "When a paper starts to go bad and go down the drain, the buck stops with me," he said. Shareholders "never ring the editor, they ring me," he said, adding that has "once or twice" led to "very unhappy but necessary decisions" to replace editors.

He said that if he buys the Journal, "I'd love to wander around....I think people quite like it if I show interest in their work." He added: "I can't put $5 billion of my shareholders money and not be able to run the business."

Oh, and about that promise of editorial independence? Been there, done that:

In London, Mr. Murdoch agreed to give extra powers to independent directors on the papers' board. The six independent members are charged with protecting the two papers' editors-in-chief from interference by the owners "in expressing opinion or in reporting news that might directly or indirectly conflict with the opinions or interests of any of the newspaper proprietors," according to the newspapers' articles of association. The six board members are supposed to have approval over the hiring and firing of the top editors, who in turn are supposed to have sole control over staffing decisions.

Mr. Murdoch is not supposed to give directions to any journalist except each paper's top editor. In a letter to the Bancroft family last month, Mr. Murdoch proposed a board "exactly along the lines of" the one he established in London for The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Murdoch made these promises as a condition of avoiding a British government review of the purchase. John Biffen, then the Secretary of State for Trade, cleared the deal in part because of the guarantee of editors' independence. Mr. Biffen says now that the guarantee was a "fig leaf" to blunt criticism that the government, in approving the deal, was granting Mr. Murdoch too much power. The government, he says, didn't consider Mr. Murdoch's promises all that important.

Several former editors of the London papers describe the independent board as ineffective, although they say that in recent years, Mr. Murdoch has left the newspapers alone. Sir Robin Mountfield, a current independent director, says the board acts like a "fleet in being," a naval term for warships that never leave port but still pose a threat to the enemy.

Frank Giles, who edited the Sunday Times from 1981 to 1983, says the board "had very little power or will to protect the independence of the papers they were appointed to safeguard."

I never imagined that I would be advocating an independent Wall Street Journal as the preferred alternative. But in a era of diminished expectations, "normal" editorial malfeasance and average reporting starts lookng pretty damned good.