What would the U.S. do if this happened here? AFP reports:

Authorities have lost track of 41,000 people ordered to leave Canada, and in most cases have stopped looking for them, said a federal watchdog Tuesday.

In a scathing report, Auditor General Sheila Fraser said most of the missing were failed asylum seekers allowed into the country on temporary permits while their immigration or refugee cases were assessed.

However, some of them "may pose a threat to public safety and security," she added.

Oh, wait -- it did happen here.

A Homeland Security Inspector General report (pdf) released last year said that the backlog of immigration cases involving immigrants ordered to leave the U.S. had reached 600,000 -- and the whereabouts of many of those, whether criminal offenders or non-criminal deportees, couldn't be determined. It's important to note that this number represents the backlog, not the number of people missing, as in Canada.

The report put the blame for the backlog, which had been increasing since 2001, on insufficient detention space and systems, along with inadequate staffing. (This focuses on ICE rather than CIS, so it doesn't take into account the long lines legal immigrants face to get in or change their status if they're already here.)

There hasn't been an internal assessment of where the "fugitive" backlog stands more recently. And though Homeland Security has received more beds and staff, it has also stepped up its enforcement efforts, so the backlog may very well still be rising, if at a slower pace.

The Canada case gives occasion to recall that this country's ad-hoc enforcement-first approach doesn't necessarily work as smoothly as advocates hope. And, as the editorial board would argue, it isn't the best approach for the country even when it works as intended.

European policy experts John C. Hulsman and A. Wess Mitchell look to 'The Godfather' for diplomatic pointers:

[Francis Ford Coppola's "The Godfather"] is also a startlingly useful metaphor for the strategic problems and global power structure of our time. The don, emblematic of Cold War American power, is struck by forces he did not expect and does not understand, as was America on 9/11. Intriguingly, his heirs embrace very different visions of family strategy that approximate the three schools of thought -- liberal institutionalism, neoconservatism and realism -- vying for control of U.S. foreign policy today.

Freelance writer Lionel Beehner has another proposal for smoother diplomacy: pronouncing foreign dignitaries' names properly. Columnist Tim Rutten tells an L.A. version of "A Tale of Two Cities," and contributing editor Erin Aubry Kaplan explores why poet and long-time Watts resident Eric Priestley is fighting City Hall to keep his home.

The editorial board praises a California Supreme Court decision voiding the death sentence of Adam Miranda, presses for a shield law, and says now isn't the time to scold Myanmar's leaders:

It has been clear for more than a decade -- and especially since last year's suppression of the would-be Saffron Revolution -- that Myanmar's odious junta cannot be shamed into reform. It is too isolated and xenophobic to worry about its image, too paranoid to learn from outsiders and too blood-drenched to believe it can survive any loosening of control over its hapless people. The contradictory combination of U.S. sanctions and an engagement strategy adopted by its neighbors has failed to produce any improvement. Attempts to use the catastrophe of Tropical Cyclone Nargis as leverage to pry open the country will almost surely fail as well.

Mayoral candidate Walter Moore said Thursday he has begun a drive to put "Jamiel's Law" on the March 2009 Los Angeles city ballot — the same one in which he is trying to unseat Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

If adopted, the law would permit Los Angeles police officers to arrest gang members for breaking U.S. immigration law. It would supersede Special Order 40, a 29-year-old LAPD policy that bars officers from arresting or questioning people solely on suspicion of being in the country illegally. Moore told a crowd of about 200 people — gathered at the Wilshire Ebell Theatre to hear about his proposal — that he decided on an initiative after hearing no response from City Council members to his request for an ordinance.

Jamiel's Law is named for Jamiel Shaw II, 17, who was shot to death by suspected gang members on March 2 close to his Arlington Heights home. Police arrested Pedro Espinoza, 19, who reportedly entered the U.S. illegally at age 4. Police say Espinoza is a member of the 18th Street Gang. He was released from jail, where he was being held on a weapons charge, a day before the killing.

Espinoza had been arrested by Culver City police and jailed and released by the Sheriff's Department, so the LAPD and Special Order 40 did not come into play. But Moore has dismissed that point, saying, in effect, that if his law had been in place, LAPD officers at some point prior to his weapons arrest would have seen Espinoza, identified him as a gang member, and arrested him on immigration charges.

The killing of Jamiel Shaw II, and Moore's advocacy for the change in the law, has united some black and white illegal immigration opponents, threatened to widen a gulf between African Americans and Latino immigrants, and forced city officials to refocus on Special Order 40. At least some LAPD officers appear to believe, incorrectly, that the policy prevents them from cooperating or even communicating with immigration authorities. A senior lead officer who misquoted Special Order 40 in a March newsletter, adding in anti-cooperation language, acknowledged that he got the wording not from the LAPD manual but from the American Patrol anti-illegal-immigration web site.

LAPD Chief William J. Bratton said he would clarify the policy for his officers. He also told the Times editorial board that he would make no changes to the order.

Moore repeated his assertion that the Times caters to Latino illegal immigrants because its parent company, Tribune, also owns the Spanish-language paper Hoy.

"The mayor, the City Council, and L.A. Times/Hoy won't take action," Moore said. "It's up to you."

Also speaking at the event were KRLA radio personality Kevin James and the young victim's father, Jamiel Shaw Sr.

James called for audience members to support Moore's campaign financially. "It's really expensive to run for mayor of Los Angeles against a former gang member who is the incumbent," James said.

Villaraigosa was not a gang member, but the claim that he was has become popular among illegal immigration opponents.

Shaw criticized the deputy district attorney prosecuting Espinoza, saying he worried she would try to portray his son as a gang member because he was carrying a red Spiderman backpack. "I want everybody to know," he said, "the fix is in."

Does Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo have too many non-lawyers on staff? The question is at the center of a verbal and email budget squabble between the city attorney and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's office, which is backing the mayor's proposed 60-person reduction of Delgadillo's non-attorney staff of 497 (the office has 556 lawyers). That amounts to a budget reduction of close to 5%.

After releasing his proposed 2008-09 budget last week, Villaraigosa visited the Times Editorial Board and had this to say about Delgadillo's office:

By the way, just so you know, they're about a 1,000-member department; only 500 are lawyers. What we're proposing to cut is administrative staff. They have administrative staff ratios, you do the research on it to confirm it, but as I understand it, they have administrative staff ratios that are greater than Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, O'Melveny & Myers, and some of the biggest law firms, which are basically three lawyers for each administrative position.

Well — not quite. Not even close, actually. Law firms have become notoriously tight with what many call proprietary figures, but several of the largest firms confirmed that the numbers published in an annual survey by the Downtown News are just about right. If you take a look at the survey and do a little simple math, you'll see that the ratio generally is the other way around: most large firms have at least twice as many non-lawyer staff as attorneys.

Delgadillo's office jumped on the Downtown News figures and argued that in fact, he's quite thinly staffed in comparison with law firms in the private sector. On Monday, Delgadillo's budget chief, Jennifer Roth Krieger, sent an email to the mayor's budget chief, Sally Choi, asking for the "source data for the information your office has put out (which shows that our office has a higher percentage of support staff than law offices in the public or private sector)." Choi responded by email that the only information the mayor's office put out was the 1:1 ratio of attorneys to non-attorneys; both emails were attached to a letter to the City Council's budget committee from top Delgadillo deputy Richard H. Llewellyn Jr.

Time to pull over and figure out what "staff" means. Law firms have in fact moved to a ratio of about three lawyers for every secretary, in part because lawyers with computers on their desks now do much of the document drafting that they used to dictate, and that their secretaries used to type up back, say, in the 1980s. But the mayor wasn't talking about the city attorney's lawyer-secretary ratio, but rather lawyers to staff.

Private firms have bulked up on paralegals, tech support, billing, marketing, and even complementary professional services like accounting. They are all administrative or support staff, and most large L.A. firms have two or three such non-lawyers for every lawyer. Delgadillo may not need a lot of that work done in-house, but he does need people to back up misdemeanor prosecutions and other functions that private firms don't have to worry about.

The comparison of city attorney and private firm staffing figures actually tells us very little, except that Villaraigosa and Delgadillo are spoiling for a fight. The city attorney told the budget committee that his staff is needed to make the mayor's LAPD build-up work. "But, without prosecution and resulting jail time," Delgadillo said, "an arrest is meaningless."

To interpret: Moving money from the city attorney to the police doesn't accomplish much.

Villaraigosa spokesman Matt Szabo said the staffing ratio was a "tangential issue." "We actually have to make real cuts to save real dollars," Szabo said.

By the way, here's something else Villaraigosa told the Editorial Board about Delgadillo:

"One council member said that if he doesn't agree to a 5% cut, maybe we ought to make it 10."

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins says the science of intelligent design is science fiction:

If we were visited by aliens from a distant planet, would we fall on our knees and worship them as gods? The difficulty of getting here from even our nearest neighbor, the red dwarf star Proxima Centauri, constitutes a filter through which only beings with a technology so advanced as to be god-like (from our point of view) could pass. The capabilities and powers of our interstellar visitors would seem more magical to us than all the miracles of all the gods that have ever been imagined by priests or theologians, mullahs or rabbis, shamans or witch doctors....

But now the question arises: In what sense would the god-like aliens not be gods? Answer: In a very important sense.

Columnist Joel Stein compares the cost of home cooking to restaurant dining.

The editorial board argues for food labels to include country of origin, says the Supreme Court's lethal injection ruling raises some questions, and wonders how much we should blame a candidate for his or her friends: 

We can learn about a candidate from the people who have had demonstrable influence on his or her thinking. Such people include personal and political mentors, business partners and major donors, lovers, spouses, close friends and, especially, advisors. It's certainly fair to judge politicians by who they've worked for, hired, appointed or fired.... But it's unfair and unwise to judge a candidate by family members (remember Roger Clinton?), or by constituents they're sure to rub shoulders with, or by casual associates who run in the same crowd.

On the letters page, readers discuss The Times' editorial on California's tax system. Valencia's Patrick Lewandowski says, "Why do The Times and many politicians feel a need to blame Proposition 13 for California's financial woes and to tinker or even eliminate it so that unaffordable, if not unwarranted, pet projects can continue?"

*Photo courtesy Hulton Archive, Getty Images

Author David K. Shipler explores how candidates' words can strike a nerve:

Whether by calculation or coincidence, Hillary Clinton and Republicans who have attacked Barack Obama for elitism have struck a chord in a long-standing symphony of racial codes. It is a rebuke that gets magnified by historic beliefs about what blacks are and what they have no right to be.

Clinton is no racist, and Obama has made some real missteps.... But when his opponents branded him an elitist and an outsider, his race made it easier to drive a wedge between him and the white, rural voters he has courted. As an African American, he was supposedly looking down from a place he didn't belong and looking in from a distance he could not cross.

Columnist Tim Rutten analyzes Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's State of the City address. Internist Albert Fuchs says the only way for a doctor to do a good job and make a living is to reject insurers. And contributing editor Gustavo Arellano notes that Fullerton's efforts to paint over murals is par for the Orange County course.

The editorial board maintains its anti-execution stance as the Supreme Court considers whether to allow the death penalty for rapists, and comments on the start of SAG negotiations. Editorial writer Lisa Richardson writes in from San Francisco, where Chevron Corp. faced off against a couple Ecuadorean environmentalists.

Readers discuss Irvine's Great Park. L.A.'s Danila Oder says, "The American 20th century experience was an anomaly and should be treated by governments and builders as such. The environmental factors that are assumed to underpin bonds for the Great Park project are no longer operative."

Columnist Jonah Goldberg has Barack Obama pegged -- he's the yuppie candidate:

For those too young to remember, "yuppie" was shorthand for young urban professionals...who allegedly represented the collapse of '60s values and the triumph of '80s greed. Yuppies sold their souls for a BMW and a condo.

Ironically, the biggest complaints about yuppie materialism came from self-loathing liberal yuppies -- like the Obamas.

The Obamas still seem stuck in that time warp, clinging to '80s-style resentments and political assumptions. Michelle Obama is never so eloquent as when she's complaining about the burden of student loans for her two Ivy League law degrees and covering the high cost of summer camp and piano lessons for her kids on her family's half-million-dollars-a-year income.

UC Berkeley's Jerome Karabel says Obama's newly-mobilizing young supporters could get alienated just as easily. Author and political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson discusses whether the black community suffers because of illegal immigration. And Steve Martin plans a bad-neighborly day.

The editorial board explores why Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez unjustly targeted MTA's Richard Snoble over the region being shortchanged on bond funds. The board also says the pope will need all his diplomatic skills for his U.S. visit, and launches a new series exploring changes for California's tax system:

Who pays too much now and sees too little in return? Who enjoys unearned subsidies? What level of taxation promotes business, and what level drives it out? Did Proposition 13 ruin everything? Nonsense. Is Proposition 13 sacrosanct? Not necessarily. Is the golden California of another era an irrecoverable ideal?

Let's find out.

On the letters page, readers discuss the cost of healthcare for prison inmates. Pacific Palisades' Pepper Edmiston has an idea: "Here's what I'm going to do if I develop a catastrophic illness: rob a bank and leave my card."

What do you do when a guy high in the running for most hated man in the world teaches at your law school? If you're Christopher Edley Jr., dean of UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall law school, you half-heartedly defend the professor while highlighting your powerlessness to do anything -- as he did last week did for his embattled faculty member John C. Yoo.

Yoo, of course, is the Berkeley law professor best known as the former Bush administration lawyer who authored the infamous "torture memo" of 2003. Besides laying out a legal argument he thought could protect practitioners of almost certainly illegal "enhanced interrogation" methods from prosecution, Yoo exhibited in his writings a stunning disregard for international law and a creepy nonchalance about expanding the president's terrorism-fighting authority. That much Edley denounces, just as the administration did when the public got wind of the memo. Edley's criticism of Yoo's work in the Bush administration isn't surprising.

More intriguing is how Edley approaches the question he set out to answer: Why is Yoo a professor at such a prestigious university when his legal advice to the most powerful man in the world has come under such resounding criticism by his colleagues? This is where Edley's insight sheds some light on the machinations of the great academy; ready why after the jump.

Columnist Rosa Brooks reminds everyone that despite the attention on the Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton mudslinging, it's the GOP that's losing ground:

Although Democratic Party infighting makes good copy, the intense media focus on the Obama-Clinton battle obscures the fact that it's the Republican Party that's in deep doo-doo. The very factors that make us wish we could forget about the war in Iraq are driving a seismic shift in the American political landscape: the likely reversal of years of GOP electoral dominance.

Speaking of the GOP's losing ground on war issues, former NATO commander Wesley K. Clark and Iraq vet Jon Soltz wonder why John McCain isn't stepping up to support a new GI bill. Columnist Patt Morrison remembers when ethnic campaigning was as simple as eating a knish and spinning pizza dough. And author Daniel Imhoff says the farm bill is too porky. 

The editorial board hopes for stronger rule of law in Pakistan, takes a look at shocking inmate conditions in Orange County jails, and says the Senate's housing relief plan is a mixed fix:

The tax breaks in the Senate bill would help home builders that profited handsomely during the boom. They would also prop up the price of foreclosed properties with $7,000 subsidies for the purchase of those homes. But the goal isn't to stop the boom-and-bust cycle from running its course or causing losses. It's to prevent the bust from being so sudden and severe that it chokes off credit, stifles consumer spending and wrecks the economy.

Readers react to Gen. David H. Petraeus' and Ambassador Ryan Crocker's testimony before Congress. Bob Constantine of Placentia has a suggesetion: "Next time Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are scheduled to report to Congress, skip the personal appearances and merely play the tape of the previous testimonies."

Special Order 40 was issued on Nov. 27, 1979 by then-Chief Daryl Gates. The order was then divided into several parts so that they could be inserted into the proper parts of the LAPD manual. To see a facsimile of the order as it was adopted, you must check with sources outside the LAPD, like this one.

To find the order as it currently applies to the LAPD, you must first go to the manual here.

Next, in the second light blue bar near the top of the page, click on Volume 1. Now scroll down to section 390 to find portions of a policy statement on immigration status adopted by the Police Commission in March 1979. Section 390 reads:

Undocumented alien status in itself is not a matter for police action. It is, therefore, incumbent upon all employees of this Department to make a personal commitment to equal enforcement of the law and service to the public regardless of alien status. In addition, the Department will provide special assistance to persons, groups, communities and businesses who, by the nature of the crimes being committed upon them, require individualized services. Since undocumented aliens, because of their status, are often more vulnerable to victimization, crime prevention assistance will be offered to assist them in safeguarding their property and to lessen their potential to be crime victims.

Now return to the top of the LAPD Manual and click on Volume 4. Now scroll down to section 264.50. This is the procedural portion of Special Order 40 that in the original order was labeled part I. It reads as follows:

264.50 ENFORCEMENT OF UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION LAWS. Officers shall not initiate police action where the objective is to discover the alien status of a person.  Officers shall neither arrest nor book persons for violation of Title 8, Section 1325 of the United States Immigration Code (Illegal Entry).

Columnist Rosa Brooks wonders if, years after their relationship got rocky, President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin can patch things up:

The U.S. can't afford to turn Russia into an enemy. If Bush wants to salvage something from his disastrous presidency, he needs to use his Sunday visit to Russia to get the relationship onto a healthier footing.

It won't be easy. Bush's Russia trip follows the NATO summit in Romania, and Bush this week reiterated his commitment to initiating a NATO "membership action plan" for Ukraine and Georgia, and to deploying missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. Because Russia regards both steps as hostile acts, it's hard to see how Bush can make much progress when he meets this weekend with Putin and Putin's handpicked successor, Dmitry Medvedev.

Hard -- but not impossible.

Indiana University's Tibetan studies program direcotr Elliot Sperling thinks the Dalai Lama may be a dupe. Columnist Patt Morrison tries to count L.A. billboards, and finds out you can't. And Capt. Jeffrey L. Greer of the LAPD and Mike Albanese of SWAT explain why changes to the elite team's selection process will improve the force.

The editorial board says a recent immigration raid in Van Nuys went about as well as a raid can go. The board also thinks Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) should be served a warrant like any other American, and argues that Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.'s plan deserves a good look.

Readers react to John Bolton's Op-Ed proposing full diplomatic recognition for Taiwan. Claremont's Chunjuan Wei, who is writing a book on the Taiwan Strait problem, says, "Strict adherence to Taiwan's 'unilateral' rights could engender unnecessary risk to U.S. national security."

Columnist Jonah Goldberg doesn't like the Darwin fish:

I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there's the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.

The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that "hate is not a family value." But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.

Attorney Kelly Valen remembers her encounter with John McCain's autopen. As the Anthony Pellicano case continues, author Will Vaus remembers his father, the original Hollywood wiretapper.

The editorial board applauds efforts to narrow AIDS vaccine research, explores why Mars rovers have so many fans, and explains that the U.S. approach in Basra requires more subtlety.

Readers react to columnist Rosa Brooks' piece warning moms to resist Disney princesses. Valencia's Natasha Wegter asks Brooks not to "punk the princesses," but Monterey Park's Ralph Mitchell thinks "Brooks doesn't go far enough in her objections."

Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) notes that sexual assaults are frequent -- and frequently ignored -- in the military:

Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq....

At the heart of this crisis is an apparent inability or unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks. According to DOD statistics, only 181 out of 2,212 subjects investigated for sexual assault in 2007, including 1,259 reports of rape, were referred to courts-martial, the equivalent of a criminal prosecution in the military. Another 218 were handled via nonpunitive administrative action or discharge, and 201 subjects were disciplined through "nonjudicial punishment," which means they may have been confined to quarters, assigned extra duty or received a similar slap on the wrist.

Writer Andrew Gumbel knows why Hillary Clinton is fighting so hard to stay in the race -- because it works. Columnist Gregory Rodriguez says Americans have a habit of hero-worshipping candidates, and it tends to backfire. Euro Pacific Capital President Peter Schiff argues that we need to hit bottom before we can recover from the housing crisis.

The editorial board wants better beef tracking, and more nuanced exploration of the links between race and gangs. The board praises the FCC for taking a broad view of media competition in approving the XM/Sirius merger.

Readers react to a shift in John McCain's rhetoric. L.A.'s Susan North says:

Listening to McCain's speech before the World Affairs Council made my brain hurt. In the speech, he admonished America to listen to our democratic ally nations. Would that be all those same nations that have been crying out, for months now, "Surge? Are you people nuts?"

Contributing editor Michael Kinsley asks a question few have dared -- how long does it take Hillary Clinton to do her make-up? He writes:

Every day for almost two years, the candidates campaign. The average day is probably 15 to 20 hours. The average amount of sleep could be four hours. Yet, every day, the male candidates can sleep an extra precious half-hour or more -- or spend the time cramming for the day -- simply because our culture doesn't impose the same rules on them about their appearance.

And these really are rules. Sure, there are women who take no more trouble about their appearance than most men do, and men who take more than the typical woman. But a middle-aged woman who is the first of her sex to make a serious run for the presidency is not going to be a pioneer in indifference to looks. One revolution at a time. She has got to look put together, all day, every day.

Columnist Rosa Brooks warns her fellow mothers against aggressively marketed, often orphaned Disney princesses. The Center for European Policy Analysis' A. Wess Mitchell notes the efforts of NATO's newer members in Afghanistan. And Harold Hall, wrongly convicted and imprisoned for 20 years, says his case shows why the state should reconsider execution.

The editorial board highlights the need for transparency in the LAPD, examines Mexico's raging drug war as it hits a small border town, and argues for habeas rights for two U.S. citizens held in Iraq.

Readers consider California's law against driving while cell-phoning. Valencia's Lisa Stevenson says:

We have always been eating, drinking coffee, reading road maps, changing radio stations, applying makeup, shaving, talking to passengers, disciplining children, groping for dropped gum, staring at sign-twirlers and beating out drum solos on our steering wheels while driving. Yet there are no laws banning these activities.

Contributing editor Ian Buruma says Tibetan culture may not survive China's modernization, except among the diaspora:

The Chinese have exported their version of modern development to Tibet, not just in terms of architecture and infrastructure but people, wave after wave of them: businessmen from Sichuan, prostitutes from Hunan, technocrats from Beijing, party officials from Shanghai, shopkeepers from Yunnan. The majority of the people living today in the Tibetan capital, Lhasa, are no longer Tibetan. Most people in rural areas are Tibetan, but their way of life is not likely to survive Chinese modernization any more than the ways of the Apaches did in the United States.

George Washington University's Jonathan Turley wonders why you can be competent to stand trial, but unfit to represent yourself. And Hope College's David G. Myers says primal urges are to blame for March madness.

The editorial board warns taxpayers that they'll face new risks as Fannie and Freddie buy more mortgages thanks to a rule change. The board also wants to know where scientific exhibits got their cadavers, and thinks the Supreme Court erred by not giving Jose Medellin, a Mexican national on death row in Texas, another day in court.

Readers discuss discussing race. Torrance's David Nelson says, "The article begins: 'How do we start a national dialogue on race?' A better question is: Why should we?"

Like the late Rodney Dangerfield, state constitutions "get no respect" in discussions of constitutional law. A rare exception came in this week's oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court over the constitutionality of the District of Columbia's gun-control law. In trying to puzzle out the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Justice John Paul Stevens asked Walter Dellinger, D.C.'s lawyer: "To what extent do you think the similar provisions in State constitutions that were adopted more or less at the same time are relevant to our inquiry?" Dellinger bobbed a bit, replying that various state constitutional provisions  on the right to keep and bear arms are written in "different terms."

Dellinger surely knew that at least one state, my native Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has a venerable state constitutional provision dealing with guns that sounds as if it was written by the NRA: "The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned" Hmm. maybe I was violating the state constitution when I was writing all those pro-gun-control editorials for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. (I'm safe now; California's constitution lacks a little Second Amendment.)

Unlike the "real" Constitution, state constitutions are sometimes prolix documents. For example, their protections of religion and freedom of expression often read like the First Amendment on steroids. The First Amendment is content to say that Congress shall make no law "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."

Here's the equivalent provision in the Pennsylvania Constitution's Declaration of Rights:

The printing press shall be free to every person who may undertake to examine the proceedings of the Legislature or any branch of government, and no law shall ever by made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. No conviction shall be had in any prosecution for the publication of papers relating to the official conduct of officers or men in public capacity, or to any other matter proper for public investigation or information, where the fact that such publication was not maliciously or negligently made shall be established to the satisfaction of the jury; and in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.

Whew!

Ironically, in this case more (verbiage) is less: Pennsylvania's version of the First Amendment is less friendly to the press, particularly in libel cases, than the First Amednment as it has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Hunting is big in Pennsylvania; so are libel suits by public officials, including judges. Too bad the framers of the constitution didn't write: "The right of freedom of the press shall not be questioned"

On this anniversary of the Iraq war, columnist Rosa Brooks is getting a five-year itch:

But I don't want to dwell on the bad times, because we did have some good times, didn't we? Remember those peaceful days between "Mission Accomplished" -- I think that was May 1, 2003 -- and ... and ... well, July 2003 or so, when we could still stroll around Baghdad at dusk, interrupted only by occasional small-arms fire? Those were the days, before the car bombs and IEDs.

We were happy then, weren't we, War?... But you can't go back again, can you?

Reason's Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch notice that all those voters moving to the center and calling themselves independent have a lot in common with Libertarians. University of Missouri-St. Louis professor Richard Rosenfeld says that when it comes to the uptick in homicides, the buck actually doesn't stop with Police Chief Bratton. And columnist Patt Morrison thinks Councilman Tom LaBonge may be ready for mayorship... of the honorary kind, in Hollywood.

New York University professor Robert E. Wright argues that when it comes to the economy, America needs a second party -- since Democrats and Republicans offer no choice at all. "Prozac Nation" author Elizabeth Wurtzel wonders what happened to feminism in a "Girls Gone Wild" world, and Jonah Goldberg explains why Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright is wrong for Obama:

A Rasmussen poll released Monday found that 29% of blacks surveyed said Wright's comments made them more likely to support Obama, while only 18% said the opposite, and half said Wright's comments would have no effect on them.

That is a symptom of a problem that platitudinous "hope" cannot alone remedy.

The editorial board eyeballs a controversial gun-control case being heard in the Supreme Court today, and shakes its head at the Fed's short-term thinking in the Bear Stearns disaster:

The Bush administration tried to dole out a ration of calm Monday. The country is going through challenging times, President Bush said, but "our capital markets are functioning efficiently and effectively." White House Press Secretary Dana Perino later added, "This isn't about bailing anyone out." Neither happens to be true, though, and that's why the stock market gyrated from open to close.

Readers also react to Rev. Wright's racially incendiary comments. Richard Hawkins asks:

If Obama is to be dismissed for his pastor's rantings, how am I to judge members of the Catholic Church who still attend in spite of its crimes against children? How do I judge members of evangelical churches when their pastors cry out, "I have sinned against God"? How far do we take guilt by association? ... To bind Obama to his pastor's every word is absurd.

Several immigration stories arising this week should remind candidates, congressional reps, and voters what's the bottom line when it comes to immigration policy.

Yesterday came news that a bailiff in Arkansas left one undocumented immigrant woman locked in a cell at a courthouse for four days without food or water, a bathroom, or any bedding. The bailiff, who has since been suspended, said he simply forgot her when he locked up for the weekend. Earlier, she had pleaded not guilty to selling pirated DVDs; the judge had required her to be held because she was an illegal immigrant. Though it was probably an honest, if awful, mistake, the woman's lawyer, for one, says its symptomatic of a wider problem: "They treat Hispanics like cattle, likes less than human," Roy Petty told the New York Times.

Today, The Times reported that 15 illegal immigrants were found adrift offshore near San Diego, after a failed smuggling attempt, languishing for a day and a half without food or water. Worse still is another account from today's Times, of immigration officials' alleged refusal of medical tests and treatment demanded by doctors for a detainee who later died of penile cancer. The officials allowed only antihistamines, ibuprofen, and extra boxers. A Los Angeles federal judge ruled [pdf] that Francisco Castaneda's family can seek damages, and had scathing things to say...

Columnist Rosa Brooks explains what the Spitzer scandal means for the Clinton candidacy:

This gets to why this scandal has the potential to be more than just distracting and uncomfortable for Clinton. Spitzergate -- and Hillary's ambivalent response so far -- reminds us that Bill wasn't the only member of the Clinton family who let women down when he was in the White House.

Remember 1992? Hillary got in hot water for telling "60 Minutes" that "I'm not ... some little woman, standing by my man like Tammy Wynette."

But later, as Bill's career became mired in scandal after scandal, it became all too clear that Hillary was willing to tolerate pretty much anything he did.

George Washington University's Patty Kelly thinks Spitzergate could have another effect -- convincing Americans it's time to decriminalize prostitution. Contributing editor Timothy Garton Ash says Britain needs to define what it means to be British. And columnist Patt Morrison argues for our right to gripe.

The editorial board explains the battle of the brass that may have felled Adm. William J. Fallon...

Evolutionary biologist David P. Barash says Eliot Spitzer can blame biology for his urge to stray:

One of the most startling discoveries of the last 15 years has been the extent of sexual infidelity (scientists call it "extra-pair copulations" or EPCs) among animals long thought to be monogamous. It's clear that social monogamy -- physical association and child rearing between a male and a female -- and sexual monogamy are very different things. The former is common; the latter is rare....

Power-as-pheromone is pretty much the default among mammals. Elk, elephant seal, baboon or chimpanzee, in a wide array of species, females eagerly mate with dominant males while disdaining subordinates. And they do so, more or less, in harems.

Contributing editor Max Boot argues that Navy Adm. William "Fox" Fallon's departure as head of CENTCOM is good news. Columnist Tim Rutten tells the City Council to quit its turf war and work to stop gang violence. USC's Sara Catania wants a stop to the springtime rite of "tree topping."

The editorial board asks if there is a constitutional right to home school your kids, and points out that daylight saving time really doesn't save anything....

Whatever you've got to say about the murder of 17-year-old Jamiel Shaw or the arrest of 19-year-old Pedro Espinoza for the crime, start your engines. Please keep it clean: no threats, bullying, bogarting or unamusing ad hominems will be accepted. I'll approve as fast as I can. Some scenes from Shaw's funeral may give the conversation a little focus.

Heather Mac Donald's lightning-rod piece on campus rape takes the top spot this week, with Dallas Weaver's Blowback on copyright a very close second. Readers didn't make this another mostly-Obama week, opting instead for conscience-stricken paparazzi and stubborn sadness. Here they are:

1. What campus rape crisis? by Heather Mac Donald
2. Copyright this, by Dallas Weaver
3. Surge doesn't equal success, by Michael Kinsley
4. The snapper snapped, by Nick Stern
5. Too good to win, by Joel Stein
6. White like us, by Gregory Rodriguez
7. What a little bird told us, by Jonathan Rosen
8. The miracle of melancholia, by Eric G. Wilson
9. Stonehenges all around us, by Craig Childs
10. Food or fuel? by the editorial board

Gregory Rodriguez advises Barack Obama to start wearing his patriotism on his sleeve -- or on his lapel -- and American University law professor Nancy D. Polikoff calls for laws to recognize the whole spectrum of family structures, whether gay or straight, married or unmarried. Civil rights lawyer Peggy Garrity assesses the damage that tort reform has caused the justice system:

A second woman is likely to face the same fate in the same court, in a suit alleging that she was drugged and brutally gang-raped by co-workers in Iraq and then held incommunicado, without food or water, in a shipping container by the same employer.... Adding insult to injury, the rape kit used by a military doctor in examining the victim was reportedly handed over to Halliburton/KBR, and doctor's notes and photos of her bruises are missing.

There was no criminal prosecution of the alleged perpetrators because they worked for a defense contractor, which is exempt from criminal sanctions under an order enacted by the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq during L. Paul Bremer III's tenure as its administrator.

That decision was outrageous enough. But now the Texas court ruling appears to say that because of the arbitration clause, these women have no standing in a U.S. civil court either.

In the next installment of its series "The Great Thirst," the editorial board predicts plans for a peripheral canal will be a win-win in the water wars between Northern and Southern California. The board also kicks off the one-year countdown to round one of Los Angeles' city elections, and calls out John McCain and Barack Obama for inching away from their commitment to public funds:

[W]ith his new front-runner status -- and facing the prospect of raising more private money than McCain in a general election -- Obama has begun to waver. Asked in the last Democratic debate if he was waffling on a promise to accept public financing, he dodged, saying that, if nominated, he wants to "sit down with John McCain and make sure that we have a system that is fair for both sides." That sounds like the "old politics" that Obama inveighs against.

Both candidates should get over their buyer's remorse. What they gain by abandoning public financing, they may lose in credibility.

Readers write requiems for Dutton's books, set to close at the end of April. "With the imminent passing of Dutton's books," mourns Burt Prelutsky, "I feel as if I am on the verge of losing a relative. That is, a relative I actually like."

Author T.C. Boyle remembers his first trip to the soon-to-be-shuttered Dutton's Books in Brentwood:

It was like stumbling into a Borgesian reality in which everything was made of books -- the walls, the floors, the ceilings, even the employees. Before I could think, there was Scott Wannberg, one of the true literary zealots of our time, exploding from behind a cordillera of books to greet me. Within minutes, I'd signed the well-represented editions of my own titles, which were on permanent display right alongside those of all the authors I most admired, and then Scott was piling my arms high with books I absolutely just had to read. He had a sixth sense, knowing exactly what I wanted and needed, and from then on, though it was a bit of a haul from Woodland Hills, Dutton's was my bookshop.

Columnist Tim Rutten asks who'll stop L.A.'s gangs. Deputy U.S. Atty. Gen. Craig Morford says crack criminals should be kept in prison. And Claremont Review of Books associate editor Joseph Tartakovsky explains why writers love to booze.

The editorial board chastises the Bush administration for lying to Britain about its rendition flights. The board also offers an update on the situation in Kenya after mediation fell apart, and compares Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's star-studded schools team with the LAUSD's vacancy-riddled roster.

Readers react to the Health Net scandal. San Luis Obispo's M.J. Johnson says, "Health Net's dropping of Patsy Bates in the midst of chemotherapy proves that wrong. The fact is, healthcare and the corporate profit motive are incompatible."

Can anything or anybody replace Barack Obama in readers' hearts? Not this week: Despite a selection of hot topics from Scientology to gun control to torture to the Christian Oscars, and even a surprise return by perennial favorite Stonehenge, Sarah M. Miller's Obama Blowback drew more traffic than the rest of the Top 10 combined. Hats off to Obama for continuing to draw readers and voters, and to you for reading the L.A. Times Opinion pages.

1. Open letter to Barack Obama, by Sarah M. Miller
2. The invasion of America, by Andrew P. Napolitano
3. A leap beyond faith, by Michael Shermer
4. 'Prayers' just won't do, by Tim Rutten
5. Hola, Obama, by the editorial board
6. Stonehenges all around us, by Craig Childs
7. Peter Principle of award shows, by Joel Stein
8. Political surge in Iraq, by the editorial board
9. Fidel's slow fade, by Jon Lee Anderson
10. Shame, Sen. McCain, by the editorial board

Fort Worth Star-Telegram Obama-rally-security-standdown story: Shocker? Stone gas? A great Dallas tradition revived for a new era? Much ado about nothing?

Jack Douglas reported Wednesday that security details, on apparent orders from the Secret Service, stopped screening for weapons more than an hour before the candidates took the stage. He followed up a little while ago with a response from the Secret Service and some interesting nothing-to-see-here comments from people who had had similar experiences at other rallies. (More on that in a moment.)

Dan Gifford, who hipped me to this story, sends in a roundup of related items:

"Security surrounding Barack Obama has been stepped up amid fears he could be an assassination target."

"For many black supporters, there is a lot of anxiety that he will be killed, and it is on people's minds. You can't make a prediction like this — like he has 'a 50 percent chance of getting shot.' But the greater his visibility and the greater his access to people, there is a danger."

"Today the phrase 'assassinate Obama' appeared on a list of the top 100 Google search terms."

As Robert Greene noted after the L.A. debates, security is not exactly written in stone at campaign events. Getting into the Democrats' event in the Kodak Theater was quite frenzied, and although I did pass through a metal detector it didn't look to me like there was any systematic security there. I'd be surprised if everybody at that event was screened for weapons: In fact, given the Hindenburg-style chaos inside and outside the theater, I'd say nobody would have gotten into the Dems' debate at all if the security had been regulation-tight. The Republicans didn't search me or even ask for tickets, which I initially took as welcome evidence that I was considered the "right sort" out in Ronald Reagan country, but they didn't seem to be sniffing anybody else either.

It's not exactly comforting that security arrangements don't seem to make any sense at a lot of venues, but it does argue against the idea that there was anything especially fishy in Dallas. Kudos to the local cops for bringing it up, anyway.

The editorial board can't commit to a trade pact with Colombia:

Colombia has a terrible record of labor violence and abuses. Labor organizers there don't just get fired, they get fired on; more organizers are killed in Colombia in one year than in the entire world. President Alvaro Uribe has created a special department to prosecute crimes against unionists, but the statistics are still dreadful. According to the International Trade Union Confederation, in the last 12 years, only 14 people have been sentenced in more than 1,100 cases of documented union murders.

The board also marvels (enviously) at New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's cunning "crack tax," and cheers on Orange County watchdog Shirley Grindle's proposal for a commission to hold politicians' feet to the fire.

On the Op-Ed page, Reason editor Matt Welch wonders what anti-war independents are doing in the McCain camp:

Too many people, wowed by the candidate's considerable charm, have convinced themselves that launching wars is for icky people like that Bush fellow, not Our John.... For Californians tempted by such delusions, it's wise to recall the famous words of the last septuagenarian to successfully seek the presidency: Trust, but verify.

Joel Stein soothes Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's frazzled nerves, and Michael Kinsley pops the GOP candidates' Reagan bubble. Ronald Brownstein watches the subprime crisis hit minority homeowners the hardest, and cartoonist Ed Stein sees an overseas power broker in the primaries.

Readers respond to the Kennedy family's split support for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama by issuing their own endorsements. Rosemary Wolohan is rooting for Clinton:

Face it, it's not 1960 any more. This is not the time to dream of idealism. We have to elect someone who is canny and tough-minded to end the war in Iraq and undo the terrible damage that has been done to the Constitution and our reputation in the world in the last seven years.

But Erin Fairbanks is setting her sights on an Obama in the Oval office:

America needs a leader who will inspire us to be better citizens, motivate our youth to action and put a face on our country that tells our shrinking world that we as a nation are capable of change, of strength in ideas and solutions, and remind us that we are one people with a powerful voice in our own destiny.

The editorial board is grateful that Liberia's Charles Taylor is finally on trial:

Taylor is just one in a depressingly long line of deposed African leaders who bled their countries dry in brutal wars against their own people and plundered their national treasuries. Yet while most of his fellow vampires have died in luxurious exile, Taylor finds himself in a detention center in Holland, stalking quarters formerly occupied by ex-Yugoslavian strongman Slobodan Milosevic....

He is on trial not for the circus of murder in Liberia for which he was ringmaster during his presidential term — a conflict that shocked the world as child soldiers loyal to Taylor, high on amphetamines and other drugs, charged into battle naked or wearing women's ball gowns — but for his role in the gruesome civil war in next-door Sierra Leone that ended in 2003.

The board asks for the recall of Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona, and examines a voter identification case before the Supreme Court.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright says democracy needs defending now more than ever. Columnist Jonah Goldberg explores voting in the age of Dr. Phil, and SUNY Cortland's Robert J. Spitzer thinks Bush ignored the Constitution when he vetoed a defense spending bill.

Readers react to the presidential campaigns on the day of the New Hampshire primary. San Francisco's James Keefer says, "Are we Californians or are we sheep? We have more votes than many small states combined — are we to be prevented from voting our choice? Let's wait until Feb. 5 and not be intimidated by these early indicators."

Columnist Joel Stein learns that heaven isn't all harps: 

The book ["Heaven"] is 533 pages long, so I decided to just call [author Randy C.] Alcorn at his ministry in Oregon. He's one of the foremost non-dead experts on heaven, having also written "50 Days of Heaven," "In Light of Eternity: Perspectives on Heaven" and "Heaven for Kids"....

The clouds-and-harp version came about for two reasons, Alcorn told me. One is Satan. The other is the early church fathers who tried to blend the Bible with Greek philosophy and wound up with a Platonic version of the afterlife stripped of the physical. In the heaven in Alcorn's book, he imagines we'll be riding on the backs of brontosauruses and throwing baseballs with Andy Pettitte. This does not sound like it will be heaven for brontosauruses or Andy Pettitte.

But that's actually the heaven on Earth that only gets going after the return of Christ.

Author Alex Frankel remembers to thank the miracle workers who make Christmas happen -- store staff and deliverymen and women. Bob Stone and Rick Cole say Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's across-the-board cut would be too painful.

The editorial board says the EPA's decision on California emissions was a politicized one, and explains why Bush finally yielded on an investigation into CIA tapes. The board also notes that Kiefer Sutherland, unlike most convicted celebs, will serve a fairly long time in a Glendale jail.

Readers react to the EPA ruling. Temple City's Robert C. Lutes says, "Under this irresponsible administration, the EPA should be renamed the EDA -- the Environmental Destruction Agency."

The grim mood of the nation did not spare readers of the L.A. Times opinion pages this week. Tales of doom, gloom, war, corruption and the ruins of ancient societies dominated our traffic (which was light, so tell a friend about Opinion L.A. already). "A more perfect union," the opener for our American Values 2008 series, barely missed the top 10 and our second, "Life," made the top 20, so if you haven't started feasting on the whole series, do yourself a favor. ("Liberty" and "Justice" went live today and will be counted in next week's traffic.) Without further ado...

1. Symptoms of an economic depression By Steve Fraser
2. AWOL military justice By Morris D. Davis
3. Stonehenges all around us By Craig Childs
4. Is this really World War IV? By Peter Beinart
5. The Supreme Court's habeas hearing By the editorial board
6. A FISA fix By Michael B. Mukasey
7. F in science, A in self-esteem By the editorial board
8. Torture's blame game By Rosa Brooks
9. Two beautiful Dems stand before us ... By Jen Sullivan Brych and Matt Vespa
10. Big Oil buys Sacramento By Jamie Court and Judy Dugan

Heal the Bay communications director Michael King confesses that he has used plastic grocery bags in the last month:

For the record, I had my wife's car, and she doesn't carry reusable bags. At the checkout stand, I was distracted by mediating a wrestling match between my rambunctious sons and missed my chance to request paper bags.

My relapse illustrates the challenges environmental groups face in moving beyond honed policy statements to change everyday behavior. Shoppers may comprehend rationally the need to alter their consumption habits, but the siren call of "convenience" and the pressures of daily life -- unruly kids and all -- conspire against the best intentions.

Columnist Joel Stein tastes Orange County's recycled water. And American University economics professor Howard M. Wachtel says that the dollar's tarnished status as a reserve currency carries a warning for the U.S.

The editorial board continues its series on American values and the next president with installments on liberty and justice.

Reader Jim Dowling of Alhambra wonders if The Times is shifting in its death penalty stance: "For years, I have been reading about The Times' view of capital punishment as barbaric; something a civilized society should not practice. This article screams to differ. I contend that the death penalty is a necessity simply because some human beings are so inherently evil that they should never have been born."

Columnist Rosa Brooks wonders who's to blame for the destruction of CIA tapes -- and for the interrogation methods they recorded:

If I had to guess, the tapes were destroyed because obstruction-of-justice charges are no big deal compared to war crimes charges.

After we find out who authorized the destruction of the tapes, the true who-done-it will remain: Who gave the CIA the green light to use interrogation methods that the agency surely suspected were criminal? Who decided to let the U.S. adopt the interrogation methods of a hundred tin-pot dictators?

Answering that one will be far more uncomfortable. It would be nice to find a scapegoat (Aha! It was Dick Cheney!), but the unpleasant truth is that the blame is pretty widespread.

USC's Charles Fleming finds poetry in e-mail spam, Columbia University's Trey Ellis wants to dispand the race police that keeps asking if Barack Obama is too black or not black enough. And columnist Patt Morrison explores the unintended consequences of Megan's Law after the murder of a sex offender.

The editorial board wants more helicopters for Darfur, new anti-torture rules in response to the CIA tape throw-away, and better regulations to prevent prosecutors from making race-based jury selections.

Readers respond to The Times' editorial series on American values. See why Northridge's Vincent De Vita says the editorial is "perfect," while Pasadena's Jordan Snedcof says it "reflects everything that can go wrong with editorial writing."

An Arizona county attorney has a new idea way of combating drunk driving, and it seems almost inspired by Megan's Law. From The