Hmmm...

Until his appointment by President Barack Obama as CIO less than two weeks ago, Kundra was chief technology officer for the District of Columbia. But yesterday, Kundra's former ninth-floor office in a downtown government building was a crime scene. A police officer was stationed in the office lobby while investigators searched through records.

A White House official confirmed today that Kundra took a leave of absence from his new CIO job shortly after federal investigators arrested two men in the D.C. government office on bribery charges. The official would not elaborate on the reasons for the leave; there were no indications yesterday that Kundra was involved in any wrongdoing.

Not a lot can be read into the leave of absence. A guilty man might not take one; an innocent man might take one, to let things get sorted out so he can return without suspicion.

For how long did Acar work under Kundra? Did they have a past history? Did Kundra recommend or hire Acar?

That seems pretty relevant. But I haven't seen the answer yet.

Some Background: Seems like Kundra was doing business with AITC for a long time.

The business had a preference in being hired due to being a "small, local disadvantaged" company. Yay for government discrimination in choosing small, local, disadvantaged and worthy companies with which to do business.

Thanks to AHFF Geoff.

Posted by: Ace at 10:18 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 2 kb.

Via Allah with more. Worth watching even if you're not a fan of basketball, just as a profile in determination. And physical endurance.

I got exhausted just watching all 9+ minutes of the highlights.

ESPN analysts yap about the game here, if you need more.

Posted by: Ace at 09:57 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

...especially if its not really Kool-Aid.

I don't know what to say about this situation. It would be standard operating procedure to make an Arkansas joke here, but the day care provider was so distraught over the mistake that she immediately gave up her license.

On the positive side, even though the kids had measurable levels of methanol in their blood, none of them appear to have been seriously hurt. This makes the whole situation one where we can snicker about it without worrying about reserving a seat on the bus to Hell.

Shit, who am I kidding: The AoSHQ crowd? One of us will probably be DRIVING that bus.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at 09:33 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 118 words, total size 1 kb.

Good idea.

If the Constitution states a requirement of office, someone must have the ability to enforce that requirement, or else it's a dead letter.

Although I haven't followed the cases carefully, the courts seem to be taking the position that no one in America has standing to challenge Obama's satisfaction of this requirement. And, I guess, that to the extent it's "verified," it's verified by the partisan electors and partisan Congress who ultimately validated Obama's election.

That won't do. Not only are these partisans, they're partisans behind a half-billion dollar campaign to get Obama elected. Somehow, I don't quite think they're neutral judges on the matter.

H.R. 1503. A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution; to the Committee on House Administration.

Will this pass Nancy Pelosi's House? Probably not. But I'll be curious to see the arguments marshaled against such a common-sense, innocuous requirement.

Assuming there are any arguments whatsoever, which there probably won't be -- Nancy Pelosi can kill this without offering a reason why.

I haven't reversed myself on Obama's underlying qualifications -- I'm sure* he's qualified -- but the Constitution imposes very few prerequisites on a would-be president, and we ought to take those seriously.

* Sure as in "beyond a reasonable doubt" sure, which prosecutors often note is not the same as "beyond any doubt, including unreasonable doubts."

But obviously some differ as to what is a "reasonable" and "unreasonable" doubt, and surely the doubts should be reduced to the lowest level possible, especially in a case -- like this one -- where doing so is so easy and routine.

I should also mention an outlook, a bias, that makes me assume Obama is qualified. That bias is Life doesn't work like that or, as detectives say after a woman is found murdered whose husband hated her, No one gets that lucky. I just have trouble believing in the Miracle Solution, the Silver Bullet, that just so happens to reverse the outcome of a bitterly-contested election we lost. It just seems a moral impossibility that after all that effort in a losing struggle, we could somehow "win" because of a piece of paper locked in a Hawaii office cabinet.

Obviously some people are more optimistic as regards bolt-from-the-blue changes in fortune. It's sort of hard to argue which POV is right.

Posted by: Ace at 09:23 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 464 words, total size 3 kb.

"Moral arrogance..."

That part of the ceremony, watched from the safe distance of my office, made me uneasy. The other part -- the ostentatious issuance of a memorandum on "restoring scientific integrity to government decision-making" -- would have made me walk out.

Restoring? The implication, of course, is that while Obama is guided solely by science, Bush was driven by dogma, ideology and politics.

What an outrage. Bush's nationally televised stem cell speech was the most morally serious address on medical ethics ever given by an American president. It was so scrupulous in presenting the best case for both his view and the contrary view that until the last few minutes, the listener had no idea where Bush would come out.

Obama's address was morally unserious in the extreme. It was populated, as his didactic discourses always are, with a forest of straw men. Such as his admonition that we must resist the "false choice between sound science and moral values." Yet, exactly 2 minutes and 12 seconds later he went on to declare that he would never open the door to the "use of cloning for human reproduction."

Does he not think that a cloned human would be of extraordinary scientific interest? And yet he banned it.

After all, doing so might force him to concede that others have good reasons for their positions, an admission that would undermine his ability to play the noble crusader.

Posted by: Slublog at 09:20 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.

File under: Of course it's too good to be true.

And: Hell no, this is not safe for work. So make sure you've got the boss preoccupied before you open it.

Danish lasses have devised a bold new plan to slow down habitual speeders. Auto speeders anyway. I'm pretty sure the rate of motorboating has rapidly increased.

Posted by: Open Blog at 09:04 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.

Yeah, it's Fuck it All Friday again.

Just...quit trying to convince us that you're working at work today, OK?

Nobody believes you. There's a forest of pencils stuck in the ceiling tiles above your desk and you keep suspiciously closing browser tabs whenever someone approaches.

They know. Give up.

I got nothin'. Well nothin' one can't clear up with conventional antibiotics, anyway.

What are you fellow members of the Mongoloid Right up to this weekend? Any fun on the horizon?

Posted by: LauraW at 07:33 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.

Noteworthy at this point only because Ace and several commenters have been engaged in a rolling discussion of what it takes to actually get into court. Standing is just one of several questions of justiciability which keep cases from being litigated on the merits. Another is issue preclusion.

In a D.C. District Court decision released yesterday (PDF), Michael Newdow is shot down on one of his Establishment and Free Exercise Clause claims. He and several other people sued in December to enjoin Chief Justice Roberts from using the words "so help me God" when administering the oath of office to President Obama. They also sought to prevent clergy from offering prayers and benedictions at the event. They wanted an injunction not just for the January 2009 inauguration, but for the next two inaugural ceremonies.

The suit was dismissed for two reasons. First, the court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to identify a "concrete and particularized injury" to themselves and because they failed demonstrate how the harm they allege is redressable by the relief they seek. Particularized injury and redressability are two components of standing. The third component, causation, is not mentioned in this case.

Second, the court held that Michael Newdow was precluded from relitigating the issue of standing to challenge inaugural oaths and prayers because he already sued on that issue in both the D.C. Circuit and in the Ninth Circuit (where the appellate courts held that he lacked standing to challenge the invocation at President Bush's 2001 inauguration).

Newdow says that he will appeal.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 07:20 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

Late start today. Still sick. Enough of a fever that I got grouchy at Ed over a trifle.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 06:56 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

Good piece of work from IMAO's Frank J. this morning. He's a funny guy.

When the G-Men finally come and grab me to take me away to a Radical Conservative Internment Camp sometime in the near future, the chance to meet Frank J. in the camp will be one of the few positives of that experience.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at 05:58 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.