Education is one of Obama's top priorities and less controversial than the economy and healthcare reform...

Curious as to why the changes to Title I made by new Secretary Arne Duncan weren't more sweeping, and instead only nibbled around the edges at the controversial No Child Left Behind law?

Steven Robinson, a special adviser to Duncan ... essentially told superintendents gathered yesterday at the American Association of School Administrators' legislative conference that if the department started to make NCLB more workable, then there would be less motivation in Congress to reauthorize it....

That was a bit much for one superintendent in the audience, who loudly commented that in the meantime, kids and districts are suffering.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2009/04/on_title_i_regs.html

Mark Ambinder:

A federal appeals court, ruling unanimously, told the federal government today that it could not assert the long-standing "state secrets privilege" to throw out entire civil cases before the discovery phase begins.

The ruling, in Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, the judges remanded the case back to a lower court and advised the government to delineate more specifically the information it wants kept secret -- but as evidence, not as a reason, in and of itself, to dismiss the case before it begins.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/04/appeals_court_limits_privilege_to_evidence_not_immunity.php

More here: http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12245958?nclick_check=1&forced=true

Decision here: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/27/0815693.pdf

Yes - it makes today's "other" news a little easier to take. Along with this from Glenn, that is:

Arlen Specter is one of the worst, most soul-less, most belief-free individuals in politics.

I so utterly agree with this sentence.

N/T

"This comment clinched it. I'm going to write about this mentality tomorrow." It's really ugly.

Beginning with the Great Secret FISA Plan and with no end in sight, these are getting increasingly painful. I don't know how you stop yourself from deleting them outright.

I agree that he should have withdrawn the claim, but I thought there was a potential upside to his (still wrong) course of action, namely a clear rejection of the claim by the courts.

The "improper" claim of state secrets has been made to shield the executive from judicial review and accountability. As I understand it, the Obama DOJ didn't have to make claim that the Bush DOJ made; it could have made a proper claim of state secrets, which would have allowed the suit to go forward (which is where we are now because of the appeals court ruling).

A clear rejection by the court happened only because the improper claim was made in the first place. It wasn't necessary to bring about a "good end;" the Obama DOJ could have done that on its own. No amount of wishful, magical, or pragmatic thinking can excuse that.

CCR Applauds Spanish Judge’s Decision to Open New Criminal Investigation into U.S. Torture Program

April 29, 2009, New York –The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which represents many of the men detained by the U.S. government at Guantánamo, praised Spanish judge Baltazar Garzon’s decision today to pursue a new criminal investigation into the torture conspiracy and the torture program at the base where five Spanish nationals were tortured and abused. and abuse of five men at the base.

The writ did not name specific officials as defendants but speaks of investigating the roles of those responsible for authorizing, planning and executing the torture program, particularly in light of the newly release torture memos and the Senate Armed Services Committee report. The case could lead to arrest warrants in Europe and, according to CCR attorneys, places new pressure on the Obama administration to appoint its own special prosecutor to investigate the crimes committed by former officials.

http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-applauds-spanish-judge’s-decision-open-new-criminal-investigation-u.s.-t

The socially conservative Foxx, arguing against a new Democratic hate crimes bill that includes new protections for gays and lesbians, described the description of Shepard's murder as a anti-homosexual attack a "hoax" -- and questioned whether prior bias crime legislation should have been named after him.

W/video: http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0409/Matthew_Shepard_killed_in_nonbias_robbery_Foxx_says.html

Why are some of you so unwilling to consider the possibility that the Obama administration is using the Bush administration's claims of secrecy (and more) for the same purpose?

Glenn: Secrecy is the linchpin, the key enabling weapon, of all government abuses. That's why Obama's embrace of the radical Bush position has been so deeply troubling.

Congrats!

Yes. And several of the mechanisms they use in their thinking can be found here: http://www.skepdic.com/selectiv.html

Congrats to you, too, omooex!

To argue that is to argue that creationism should be taught alongside evolution, and that attempts to engage in proving the validity of creationism should be allowed in science classes, or at least not rebutted and ridiculed for the utter shiite that they clearly are.

This reminds me... I've noticed that people who believe in an Obama master plan don't necessarily believe that creationism should be taught in schools or in certain 9/11 theories, etc. and vice versa. It's fascinating to me that someone can think rationally about one and irrationally about the other.