Lagniappe - Well, well ... I'm back. I've just about given up on trying to resolve to post on a somewhat regular basis. My life is just too preoccupied with other more important things like my job and my family. But, I refuse to give up the ghost because I enjoy posting when I can. I'm sure what little readership I had has now long disappeared, but I've always kinda just done this for myself anyway, so ... what the hell! I'll keep writing for myself and for those who do peek in every now and then.

What has really prompted me to write is an insight that I've recently had about the more subtle race-baiting of the right which has emerged in the debates swirling around the democratic filibuster of Miguel Estrada's nomination to the federal bench. Personally, I think Estrada's ideological tilt is far right of mainstream; but I must say that my gut tendency is to advocate his nomination for one reason only: that he's an Hispanic and we need more Hispanics of all political persuasions involved in our political system in significant ways. I may be an ideological sellout because of this position, but at least I can remain true to my belief in greater ethnic diversity in public officialdom.

Now, the funny thing about this is that, by reading some of the more rabid anti-affirmative action conservative columns these days, one might get the impression that my position, if it gets Estrada confirmed, is fine and dandy. I can't tell you how many Conservative columnists have worked themselves into a frenzy because the "diversity-friendly" democrats don't see Estrada as "Hispanic enough" to meet the affirmative action threshhold. Quite frankly, I'm surprised that conservatives would make this an issue, even if to criticize apparent democratic dishonesty on the issue. By making Estrada's ethnicity the focal point of the discussion, conservative critics of Senate Democrats have simply resorted to the use of the race card in an effort to shame democratic opponents of Estrada. I would suspect that conservatives would find any reference to ethnicity as a yardstick in any context quite distasteful - but I am finding that ethnicity is manipulated as much by conservatives as by liberals. The difference, however, seems to be that conservatives make gratuitous use "race" to throw "race" back in the face of liberals. Today, Miguel Estrada is the "racial" cause celebre of conservatives much like Clarence Thomas was the "racial" cause celebre of the past. In fact, conservatives are much more likely to point to the ethnicity of these folk as central in a discussion of the issues surrounding their nominations than any liberals are. The argument that I see most frequently from conservatives is not that race doesn't matter, but rather how much it desperately does matter to them when it seems to behoove their cause. It's almost as if conservatives will say how race doesn't matter to them and shouldn't to anybody, but get simply livid when a liberal doesn't stick true to their affirmative action proclivities. Tell me if I'm missing something here, but it seems that conservatives consider affirmative action so reprehensible and then spit fire when it isn't practiced by liberals. I fear that, down deep in the recesses of conservative attitudes, the "racism" of the affirmative action kind (which is a conservative position regarding affirmative action, mind you, not a liberal one) would not only be expected, but also quite welcomed, if it served conservative ends. In short, when conservatives point to supposed liberal inconsistency with regard to racial preferences and affirmative action, they simply confirm how important it is to take race and problems of discrimination on the basis of race into account.

In the end, I would think that conservatives would welcome liberal opposition to Estrada on the basis of ideology rather than because he happens to be Hispanic. To criticize liberals for not towing the affirmative action line only makes it more likely that liberals will tow this line in the future. What is it that conservatives want? To me, it seems conservatives want and need liberals to be pro-affirmative action so they can ridicule and bury them during Clarence Thomas and Miguel Estrada moments. Fine. But then just don't pretend that the conservative vision on race is based on the absence of "color consciousness." For it seems that, when it comes to conservative discourse with liberals on issues of race and affirmative action, Estrada's principle value to conservatives is his "color" rather than his legal opinions on the subject. It's ironic that conservatives are flaunting Estrada's ethnicity, while the filibustering Democratic senators are more insterested in hearing his legal opinions. I wonder how Estrada feels about that.

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Long time, no post. Well, so it goes when one is occupied with other more important things. But I won't give up the ghost just yet. Bush's absolutely disastrous Latin American policy is beginning to be noticed by more than just the specialist journalist like Andres Oppenheimer or the interested academic like me. Peter Bienart of The New Republic has an excellent piece on the very points about Bush's (non) Latin American policy that I have been harping on for so long now. His last few comments in this article are both sarcastic and sad:

Perhaps the White House will turn its attention south as 2004 approaches. Then again, if Karl Rove decides on a different strategy to woo Latinos, maybe Bush can finally admit that he has given up on Latin America. Which would make sense--since Latin America has pretty much given up on him.

Kingfishery & Kingcakery - Bruce Alpert has this piece on Mary Landrieu's latest meeting with the US Trade Representative on the purported sugar deal with Mexico. While I have mixed feelings on this deal as a policy initiative, I remain convinced that the way the Bush team handled this news during the Landrieu/Terrell election was deceitful and opportunistic. Bush is a liar and a conniver, just like most any other politician - and his supporters shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Clay who? Like the energizer bunny, Bush's Latin American policy keeps going, and going, and going ... down the drain. As Andres Oppenheimer notes in the column linked to above, Bush sends people like Clay Johnson III, his deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, to attend the inauguration of a Latin American head of state as head of the US delegation. Even Oppenheimer had no clue who Johnson was, and had to make a few phone calls to find out. Bush should not be surprised when Latin America comes up to bite his global foreign policy initiatives in the a**. As past US Presidents have discovered after behaving so cavalierly towards the region, Latin America will get the US's attention in other, more troubling ways, if it can't get the US's attention in the course of normal, stable, day-to-day affairs that carry some importance within the region.

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Is Brazil planning to join the nuclear club? Jeesh!! At least Brazil is friendly towards the United States ... for now. We'll see how Bush treats Lula's government.

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Want to see what Bush's failure in his Latin American policy has meant for his ability to carry out his objectives in other, "more important" parts of the world? Check out this interesting story on how the Venezuelan crisis (due in part to Bush Administration incompetence) is affecting the likelihood of going to war with Iraq. Message to Bush: Ignore Latin America at your own peril!

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Bye-Bye, Otto Reich - and good riddance! Apparently, Reich fell out of favor even with some Republican members of Congress - not to mention Colin Powell. Can't say that I'm very happy about this Noriega fellow as his replacement, though. I don't know that much about him. I'll do some homework and give my two cents as soon as I get a chance. Boy, there's a lot going on in Latin America these days - all a reflection of the Bush Administration's absolute failure with regard to the region. As Andres Oppenheimer has recently written about Bush's Latin American Policy: What policy? Bush's negligence of the region and his utter lack of leadership has only added to the upheavals and crises that the region is experiencing. Hell, Bush's best shot at making an impact in the region (with the Fox Administration of Mexico), has taken an irreversible turn for the worse with Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Jorge Castañeda resigning because of the Bush Administration's inability or unwillingness to shape a constructive and engaged relationship with Mexico. He just simply got fed up with grovelling at the doorstep of the White House. Castañeda is not a man to take such patronizing snubs lightly, and his resignation will cause Bush even more trouble as his replacement is outspokenly critical of NAFTA. All Mexico has to do to terminate its adhesion to NAFTA is to give six month's notice of its intent to withdraw. This probably won't happen with Fox at the helm, but watch the debate surface and gain some steam in Mexico to the embarrassment of Bush, whose plan for the hemisphere includes an extension of the free trade regime. Hey, let's look at the record: Bush flubs the situation in Venezuela during the first briefly successful, but ultimately unsuccessful coup against Hugo Chavez (look what results that has borne in Venezuela now!); Bush snubs the newly-elected President of Brazil by refusing to send even Colin Powell to attend the inauguration; and now Bush can be blamed for Castañeda's quitting the Mexican government. This policy drift is dangerous and pathetic.

Lagniappe - Finally, a Republican with the "cojones" to be REALLY pro-life. Republican Gov. George Ryan of Illinois, as the papers are quipping, emptied the state's death row. How outraged will Republican pundits be? I hope plenty outraged ... so much so that they can't keep this brave and morally correct act out of the news. All of George Ryan's foibles aside, he is to be admired for this singular act. I can't say I think the man deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, as some are saying; but he'll certainly be remembered and honored much more for this than for anything else he's done in office. Good for you, Mr. Ryan!

Lagniappe - Well, I've stumbled across all by myself a great "Bushism" - always good for a laugh. Apparently, in defending his absurd $670+ billion tax cut plan, Bush railed against his critics who say the plan favors the rich by complaining about the "class war of politics". What the hell does this mean? Does he mean that the actual various social classes are fighting a war of politics? I think he means the "politics of class warfare" in which politicians who may or may not come from a particular social "class", use the divisions between the classes (i.e. "class warfare"), in their political jockeying. Come on, Bush! Get your turns of phrases correct! Show some intelligence, for goodness' sake!

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Lula has taken over the reins of government in Brazil, thus inaugurating an opportunity for a type of "new-left" leadership for the region. Andres Oppenheimer explains that Lula is not to be feared as some Conservative Republicans do; and that Bush made a mistake in snubbing Brazil by not sending Secretary of State Colin Powell to attend the inauguration. Just goes to show that the Bush Administration's Latin American policy is very misguided and captive to the narrow interests of the "anti-leftist" leadership of Otto Reich.

The "Weak" in National Review - From the man (Jay Nordlinger of Impromptoupees) who has gone to the ends of the earth to rail on Jimmy Carter: "It’s amazing how far people will go just to jab Reagan." What is "amazing" is that Nordlinger should find such behavior amazing at all.

Lagniappe - Welcome to the New Year! I hope all have had a pleasant holiday season and are ready to get back to it (whatever "it" is). My top tens for the following year are:

Top 10 desires:
10 - That some courageous movie producer and director team up to make a blockbuster movie series out of C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia. I've just read the entire series for the first time with my daughter, and find it worthy of some visual interpretation. I think it would be a smash at the box office as well.
9 - That I get to play golf more often.
8 - That the United States avoids war completely.
7 - That the final installment of the LOTR trilogy is released sooner than next December.
6 - That the United States pays better attention to Latin America as a region and that the region is given the respect that it deserves, and not the cold shoulder.
5 - That Catholics come to a greater understanding of the Church's Social Justice teachings.
4 - That the New Orleans Saints make it to the playoffs (and beat Atlanta twice!)
3 - That Jesuit High School of New Orleans admits women.
2 - That Alberto Gonzalez be Bush's replacement selection for Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist and that Justice Gonzalez turn out to be just like Justice David Souter.
1 - That my 2 little girls and my beautiful wife have a healthy and happy year, and that my oldest daughter find herself enrolled in the International School of Louisiana.

Top 10 predictions:
10 - That the United States will, sadly, go to war with Iraq.
9 - That the New Orleans Saints will not only fail to make the playoffs, but will also have a losing season.
8 - That the Pittsburgh Steelers will win the superbowl and the AFC will win the All-Star Game.
7 - That the PRI will capture an absolute majority of the Mexican Congress.
6 - That my oldest daughter is accepted into the International School of Louisiana.
5 - That Venezuela and Ecuador will each experience military coup attempts.
4 - That Fidel Castro will die of natural causes.
3 - That the GOP will again lose control of the Senate.
2 - That George W. Bush's approval ratings slip below 40% as the domestic economy fails to improve and as his foreign policy continues to hurl down the path of incoherence and inconsistency.
1 - That the final LOTR installment is everything and more than it is expected to be.

Kingfishery and Kingcakery - This release on the "secret" Mexican sugar deal from US Rep. David Vitter's website. Nothing new here.

Kingfishery and Kingcakery - The Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation's President had something to say about the "sugar" deal with Mexico. This column, printed for use by the media over the week of December 16, basically claims that not much is known at all about such a sugar deal, at least among the state's sugar producers. Vitter's comments seem to suggest that there is a lot of information about this "sugar deal" out there; but what's revealing about the LFBF President's letter is that sugar farmers have been kept out of the loop. The fact that this is so seems to indicate that the deal has not been revealed to Louisiana sugar farmers because it would not be welcome by them. As I can dredge up more information on this "secret" sugar deal, I will post it here.

Kingfishery and Kingcakery - U.S. Rep. David Vitter (R, La.) has written a Christmas day letter to the editor of The Times-Picayune on the US-Mexican Sugar deal. The letter reads:

I was happy to see The Times-Picayune's Dec. 20 article on the substantive issues surrounding the U.S.-Mexican sugar trade negotiations. Since this is such a complex issue, I feel it is important to elaborate on several key points.

First, while U.S. negotiators had hoped to finalize an agreement by year's end, this is unlikely given that at least four major issues remain unresolved. They are: the ratio of raw to refined sugar that Mexico can import into the United States, how these imports must be spread out throughout the year rather than concentrated in one short period of time, whether Mexico can import cheap sugar from other countries while it exports sugar into the United States, and whether the U.S. sugar industry can employ all of the legal mechanisms normally available to settle future sugar disputes.

Second, the Mexican responses in the ongoing sugar negotiations have gotten slower over the last two months. This brings up the question of whether in fact Mexican political forces are mounting, which could stall or unravel any deal. In addition, the United States has stated that any deal would be contingent on Mexico eliminating its 20 percent tax on corn sweeteners.

Third, I am continuing to work hard with a number of others to make sure the ideas and concerns of the Louisiana sugar industry are fully appreciated. These efforts on the part of many people are yielding at least some limited, positive results. For instance, on Dec. 18, U.S. trade negotiators met with U.S. sugar industry representatives for a detailed briefing.

U.S. Rep. David Vitter

Washington

Such clarification and such detail. How does Vitter know so much and why do Louisiana's sugar farmers know so little? This "secret" deal is only now partially coming to light. And we still know very little about the details other than what Vitter and "US trade negotiators" are willing to release. Again, the question remains: Did Bush effectively lie about this secret sugar deal when he denied its existence after Mary Landrieu brought it up during the Louisiana Senate run-off election? Spin it left, spin it right, spin it round and round until we are dizzied by it ... Bush lied. Period.

Lagniappe - To my liberal friends and family, Merry Christmas! To my conservative friends and family, Merry Christmas! I would not be able to enjoy the holidays as much as I do without all of you.

Lagniappe - How generous of the New Orleans Saints to give the people of Cincinnati and their Bengals such a nice Christmas present. The Saints do not deserve a playoff spot. Their performance today was deplorable.

Lagniappe - So, Trent Lott apparently claims that he fell into a trap set by his enemies. How dare they?!? You know ... those sneaky enemies "within" who first sent him the invitation to Strom Thurmond's birthday party ... and then forced him to accept it ... and then programmed his brain to spew forth the vile that came out of his mouth ... and then orchestrated his ouster as Majority Leader!

Take a look at Lott's own words here; and notice especially that they came following a question about whether he received enough support from the White House! Lott can cleverly try to imply that these "enemies" are the anti-Mississippi (Yankee??), anti-Conservative (liberal??), and anti-Christian (atheist?? Jewish??) crowd, but Lott can really only be talking about his fellow Republicans in Washington, DC, because they're the only ones that could have even remotely "set him up" for such a fall - absurd idea though it is. I love it. Keep talking, Trent. All the way through the 2004 elections!

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Evidence of Islamic terrorist activity in Latin America is all the more reason for the Bush Administration to take the region seriously and to promote an effective and respected Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. Again, Otto Reich is too complicit in the "institutional" terror of Latin America's military authoritarian regimes of the 1970s and 1980s to be an effective anti-terrorist advocate in the region. I said it before and I'll repeat again: Good Riddance, Reich. To Bush: Where's your leadership in forging solidarity and dialogue with our neighboring countries to the South?

Cuaderno Latinoamericano - Interesting article in today's New York Times about ex-President of Peru Alberto Fujimori's speculative return to Peruvian politics. The story is all too familiar in the context of Latin American personalistic politics, and the seemingly limitless ability of the Latin American people to forgive and forget their corrupt, but colorful and charismatic, leaders. The most interesting item in this report, from my point of view, is the prospect of an Alan Garcia/Alberto Fujimori competition for the country's presidency in the not-too-distant future. Both Garcia and Fujimori saw a meteoric rise to power, followed by just as meteoric a fall into exile and disgrace, with the distinct possibility of rehabilitation and resurrection. Nothing particularly controversial or special about this article, just a topic of interest and one to watch.