Conflict in Italian Politics, Just the Norm

As everyone's favorite, handsome, dashing, token Italian friend, I feel obliged to report to you all what's happening in the motherland.

Premier Silvio Berlusconi (pictured left) says everything is A-OK (see hand gesture) and does not concede defeat to center-left leader Romano Prodi, who won the election by a "razor thin margin," according to the AP.

This is Italy's version of W. vs. Gore in 2000.

Berlusconi, alleging irregularities, demands a recount, a process that could take weeks. Prodi won by a margin of about 25,000 over the 38 million votes cast. Approximately 84 percent of registered voters got the polls -- compare that to the 60 percent voter turnout for the 2004 U.S. presidential election.

According to the AP, "Prodi says his government would pass a new conflict of interest law but added that it would not be to punish Berlusconi, who is Italy's richest man and the owner of a media empire that includes the country's largest private broadcaster as well as insurance, real estate and publishing interests."

Conflict of interest is one of many factors that have resulted in the political instability characterizing post-WWII Italy. There have been 60 governments in about as many years since the end of the war and it gets worse: Italy has only won one post-war World Cup (1982).

A Few New Photos

I posted some family photos in a new album at Yahoo! Photos.

Also, I've been using Flickr to host my high resolution, artsy/cool photo gallery. I've been uploading new pictures there often, and you can always click the new Flickr link in the right sidebar to view my newest images. Enjoy, and feel free to comment on the photos using the Flickr comments links.

There's a Leak in the White House

I have a headache. I'm trying to get a grasp on this intelligence leak story.

From what I gather, former White House aide/prominent scapegoat Lewis "Scooter" Libby testified that V.P Dick Cheney told him that W. had given the green light to "leak" to reporters (Scooter chose crappy New York Times reporter Judith Miller) about previously classified material on Saddam Hussein's nuclear intentions.

W. and Cheney are getting slammed by Democrats who allege that the White House also authorized the disclosure of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, an Iraq war critic. Democrats link the Valerie Plame leak and the pre-war intelligence link together because they came from the same source, Scooter.

Scooter faces trial on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly lying to the grand jury and investigators about what he told reporters about Plame. If I got any part of this story wrong, which wouldn't suprise me, please make a comment.

So the the question becomes: Was the W. "declassifying" intelligence for national interest or for political interest? It's clear that "declassifying" pre-war intelligence was intended to garner support for the war, but to what extent was the White House willing to silence critics? White House Press Corp. punching bag Scott McClellan said Friday:

"The president believes the leaking of classified information is a very serious matter. And I think that's why it's important to draw a distinction here. Declassifying information and providing it to the public when it is in the public interest is one thing. But leaking classified information that could compromise our national security is something that is very serious, and there's a distinction."

Clearly, McClellan is trying to differentiate declassifying pre-war intelligence (which doesn't compromise national security) and "leaking" the identity of a CIA agent (a federal offense) as an alleged act of revenge.

W.'s in a sticky situation. An AP-Ipsos poll puts his job approval rating at 36 percent, his lowest ever in that poll. Only 35 percent approve of his handling of Iraq, which should be his approval rating cornerstone.

While the leak is still unraveling, I'll make a few points:

• This story is way too complex for the public to easily comprehend and probably doesn't greatly affect polls.
• What ever happened to the good old Clinton days? Sex scandals were so much easier to understand.
• W.'s not in any trouble. The president has the authority to declassify material. So, once W. authorized the leak, it became declassified material. By default, he's not at fault.
• Politicians should not play "Telephone." W. had a message that was relayed to Cheney that was relayed to Scooter. The message could have changed in the relay.
• Democrats are trying to connect Scooter's actions to W., but that could be a long reach.
• I'm going to go take some Aspirin and will stop analyzing this leak. And then I'm going to go take a leak.

Klipsun Takes the Prize

My undergraduate accolades continue to grow! I was notified by an old prof that Klipsun was awarded Best Student Magazine 2005 by the Society of Professional Journalists Region 10. Further, Jamie Trudel won First Place Magazine Writing for "Two Men and a Baby," which was the center-spread story in the pictured issue (my first issue as Editor In Chief).

I'm going to take mucho credit for this award. Thank you very much. Six Klipsun issues were produced in 2005. I was photo editor for the first issue. I was managing editor for the following two issues. I was Editor In Chief for the following two issues. And, okay, I didn't work on the final issue.

I'm quite stoked about the award, especially because we beat the other WWU magazine, Planet. It's squashed Klipsun for the better part of the last decade. Now Klipsun and Jamie are off to compete in the national competition. Woot!

The Illegal Immigration Debate

Yesterday, thousands of immigrant rights supporters marched across the Brooklyn Bridge. Last week, an estimated 500,000 people marched through L.A.

What's to be done about illegal immigration, aside from political posturing?

There is legislation, already approved in the House, which would make it a felony to be in the U.S. without the proper immigration paperwork. What are we doing? Trying to make a crime more illegal? There's also competing legislation that would give the estimated 11-12 million "undocumented" immigrants living in the U.S. a chance at citizenship. The ironic thing about this legislation is that illegal immigrants always had a chance to legally immigrate. They chose not to. The U.S. should not honor those who break its laws with citizenship. This leads me to a letter-to-the-editor I read today in the Seattle P-I:

If a person has entered this country illegally, no matter if it was yesterday or 30 years ago, that person should have to leave this country posthaste. My wife came to this country 10 years ago. We jumped through all the hoops, filed all the necessary documents, paid all the fees, disclosed our personal and monetary lives to the government.

As soon as was possible, my wife became a U.S. citizen. She has learned the English language, she keeps up to date on current events and never misses a chance to vote. We did it all correct and honest. Anyone coming here from another country who wants to enjoy the freedoms and benefits we have to offer must do so the correct and honest way or leave.

We have laws that address this issue and there should be no debate about it. -George Britton

The big problem with illegal immigration is that we're encouraging it. It's too easy, and legal immigrants who "jump through the hoops," like Mrs. Britton, are discouraged by waiting in line while others are "jumping the fence" and gaining benefits of U.S. citizenship without the hassle. Illegal immigrants who are already here should not be deported, but they should face the same laws they already face if they choose not to naturalize.

Border security is important and needs to be tightened. Hell, we just want to know who's here. If I'm having a party at my house, I'd want people to come through the front door, not the side window. Surely, illegal immigrants wanting to work and gain a better life cross our borders, but so do illegal drugs and criminals. We already have an immigration system in place which allows those looking for a better way of life to enter the United States while stopping the drug trade and catching criminals.

The focus needs to be upon border security, not illegal immigration. If we regain control of our borders then "undocumented" immigration will no longer be a problem and immigrants will continue to legally enter the United States to live their American dreams.