Michael Rothfeld of the LA Times quotes from the report by Inspector General David R. Shaw, which details myriad oversights by parole agents, including the following:

— Federal parole records showed Garrido had a soundproof room in his yard, but the state never reviewed these records.
— Garrido's parole officer actually met one of his daughters with Dugard last year, but accepted the explanation that she was his niece.
— Garrido wore a satellite tracking device, but agents ignored alarms that indicated he had gone outside his allowed area or broken curfew. They also didn't investigate when the device stopped working for nine hours nearly every night for an entire month.
— Parole officers didn't make all of Garrido's required home visits or perform all required drug tests, and they didn't interview witnesses who saw children on his property.

And last, but not least:
— In 1999, a parole agent misclassified Garrido as needing "only low-level supervision," a classification that enabled him to avoid more serious scrutiny all the way up to his arrest this year.

According to the report, California failed to follow parole protocols for Garrido 90% of the time — which, for those of you keeping score at home, is an F. Interestingly, California proposes to prevent future lapses like that not by cracking down further on all criminals — like, say, Miami — but by adjusting their priorities. Rothfeld writes that the state is moving to "reduce supervision on lower-risk parolees," allowing parole officers to work with smaller caseloads and devote more time to people who may turn out to be truly dangerous. As long as California can avoid further misclassifications, this sounds like a good strategy. Americans tend to respond to horrific crimes with calls for increased toughness, but the results can be measures like putting public urinators on sex offender registries — treating minor criminals like major criminals and giving men like Garrido a place to hide.

It wasn't just force that kept Jaycee Dugard prisoner for 18 years, or that kept his wife silent all that time. Garrido clearly knew how to manipulate people — so much so that when Dugard and her daughters finally appeared together before a parole agent, she initially lied to protect her captor. The state of California — and the country — will need more than across-the-board "tough on crime" measures to protect citizens from men like him. They'll need to be smart, and to distinguish between real threats and false ones — hopefully, California's reforms will allow its parole agents to do just that.

Jaycee Dugard Case Elicits Strong Criticism From California Prison Watchdog [LA Times]
Official Describes Jaycee Dugard's First Meeting With Authorities [LA Times]
Reform Vowed After Garrido's Shoddy Parole [CBS]

Because, you know, what the world needs now is more lawsuits.

Schwarzenegger, himself a celebrity, has approved a measure which states that the rights of a free press "to report details of an individual's private life must be weighed against the rights of the individual to enjoy liberty and privacy." That sounds reasonable… or does it?

Magazines and blogs (like this one) buy pictures of stars everyday; how are we to know if the snapper was over Lindsay Lohan's property line or not? What if you were fined for clicking on an illegally obtained photo? What if you went to buy ice cream, and later found out that the ice cream you bought was stolen, and you were being sued by a rich person for eating it?

As Dionne Searcy writes for the Wall Street Journal:

Some legal experts… question whether the California law is enforceable. In general, it remains legal for individuals to take photographs of other people, as long as the photo is snapped in a public place. In many cases, they add, it can be difficult to determine where a photo was taken after the fact.

In addition, there's a concern that celebrities are getting special treatment. Your house is on Google Street View; journalists have the right to pursue a story by knocking on your door or photographing you on the sidewalk if you are, say, a dry-cleaner ripping off customers, a lottery winner or a suspected terrorist.

But a measure okaying lawsuits is really saying: Celebs! Go ahead and sue. You have money! The snappers and blogs and magazines will be sorry they fucked with you.

Look, I'm not saying it's right to jump a hedge to get exclusive picture of someone's backyard wedding. Laws should not be broken. But taking a magazine or blog to court and fining them as much as $50,000 for not knowing that shot is illegal doesn't seem right either.

A New California Law Places Paparazzi Under The Spotlight [WSJ]

[Los Angeles, September 17. Image via Getty.]

LOS ANGELES, CA - SEPTEMBER 17: A student applauds as California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rev. Jesse Jackson attend an assembly of students at Dorsey High School on September 17, 2009 in Los Angeles, California. The governor encouraged the students to take a more active role in the future of California. Schwarzenegger announced he is calling on the legislature to enact statutory changes to qualify the state to compete for the $4.35 billion federal competitive grant program in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, called Race to the Top, for education reform and improvement. (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)

[Tujunga, California; September 1. Image via Getty]

TUJUNGA, CA - SEPTEMBER 01: A resident wipes her eyes as she clears brush from behind her home September 1, 2009 in Tujunga, California. The out of control Station Fire has burned more than 120,000 acres, over 50 homes and has forced thousands of evacuations as nearly 10,000 homes are threatened. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

[Los Angeles, August 30. Image via Getty]

LOS ANGELES, CA - AUGUST 30: Evacuated resident of Altadena, California, Cecilia Miller (L) and Teresa Martinez look at a map of the Station Fire posted on a wall at an evacuation center at La Cresenta High Scool gymnasium on August 30, 2009. A broad swath of the northern Crescenta Valley was evacuated Ssaturday, as the out of control Station Fire tripled in size to more than 35,000 acres and burned towards homes from Pasadena to the San Fernando Valley. The wildfire, which broke out Wednesday afternoon near a ranger station and the Angeles Crest Highway above La Canada Flintridge, has forced thousands of evacuations as nearly 10,000 homes are threatened. (Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

[Sacramento, July 23. Image via Getty]

SACRAMENTO, CA - JULY 23: California State Sen. Denise Ducheny (D-San Diego) watches the vote tally as Republicans vote no on a solution to the state's budget problem on the evening of July 23, 2009 in Sacramento, California. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders reached a budget deal June 20 to close California's $26 billion budget gap. (Photo by Max Whittaker/Getty Images)

Hern and Deakin applied to DoSomething.org to fund their project, the Sisterhood of the Traveling BDUs (BDUs are a reference to the more casual uniforms worn by soldiers) to help fund a conference for other teen girls struggling with the problems that come from having their military parents stationed abroad. They told NPR's Daniel Zwerdling:

Hern and Deakin say their idea was inspired by the misery they felt after their fathers, both members of the National Guard, went to Afghanistan. For instance, they say their friends basically deserted them.

"I was like a social pariah because my dad was gone, and they didn't know how to handle it," Hern says, sitting in her family's backyard near Fresno.

Both girls said they started doing more poorly in school, lost interest in extracurricular activities and isolated themselves, feeling misunderstood.

While such feelings are not uncommon among soldiers' kids, experts say they often hit children whose parents are deployed in the National Guard even harder.

Therapists who work with military children say this is a common problem, especially for kids like Hern and Deakin, whose fathers are working in the National Guard instead of in the Army, say, or the Marines. If their fathers lived on military bases, all the other children in the area would share the same problems. But National Guard troops are scattered around the community. Hern says none of her friends had military parents, so they didn't know how to react when her dad went to war.

Inspired by a speech by Maria Shriver, they came up with the idea for Sisterhood of the Traveling BDUs and the conference. And they looked to the military for help.

Soon, they hammered out a detailed blueprint in PowerPoint form - and then asked to present it to Brig. Gen. Kight at the National Guard headquarters in Sacramento.

Today, Kight remembers trying to contain her emotions as the 16-year-olds stood in front of a screen in the National Guard conference room and laid out their ideas.

"I just wanted to run up and hug them, they had so much to say," Kight says.

Kight's support wasn't just emotional. We contacted the public affairs office of the California National Guard, and Kight and her staff took the girls' idea straight to the top (and got support).

When we emailed the California National Guard asking if it was moving forward, we got a resounding "yes." According to Lieutenant Colonel Jon Siepmann:

Most of the activity to date has been in planning and building the organization. The National Guard just recently received approval to operate the event as a Morale Recreation and Welfare (MWR) activity, meaning that it can receive military funding and support. That really was the final step to letting the girls go out and begin fundraising and looking for sponsors for the event. It is scheduled for 12-14 March 2010.

So now they've got the National Guard on board, they just need the rest of the money to host the event and get the girls there!

Two Military Daughters Start Sisterhood For Teens [NPR]
Sisterhood of the Traveling BDUs [DoSomething.org]

Californians, aren't you so super psyched to be in the news? The "Public Service Announcement" promotes something about you guys, although it's unclear what. Black and white photography? Tank tops? Hair which curls on your shoulders? There are veiled references to Carrie Prejean — Brook Lee, Miss Universe 1997, says, "I believe when I express my opinion, I have the responsibility to do it respectfully." Uh, okay. A smattering of other Misses echo, "with respect, respect, respect!" Meagan Tandy, Miss California USA 2007, arms crossed so we can't see if her boobs are fake or not, says, "I believe Californians may disagree on some things, but we all take pride in our state's diversity." Well, you may believe that, but that doesn't make it true! If you blink, you'll miss Miss California Pageant president Shanna Moakler. But you will see Tami Ferrell, Miss Teen USA 2003 and Miss California 2009 runner-up, who is now the "Beauty of California ambassador." She was the one some thought might (dun dun dun) take Carrie Prejean's crown!

Anyway, all of this is not to say that the PSA is terrible. It's not. I mean, I don't know what it's for, but it seems like it's trying to be positive. And if you're into hearing a bunch of women — who rose to "fame" while laquered with makeup and wearing bikinis — talking earnestly about what they "believe" while dressed down and shot in black and white to look "serious" — then this clip is for you! Such as. The rest of us will just be patiently waiting until all of these people, and what they believe, are, once again, irrelevant. Clip below.

Beauty Ambassador Tami Farrell In Miss California 'Diversity' PSA [LA Times]
MISS CALIFORNIA USA "I BELIEVE" PSA [YouTube]
Earlier: Miss California Official Goes After Intolerance By Name
Did California Pageant Officials Buy Carrie Prejean New Breasts?
Miss California Stars In Anti-Gay Marriage Ad
Miss California Doesn't "Believe" In Gay Marriage ("No Offense")
Who Needs A Scholarship When You Can Get Sponsored Breasts?

Challengers have leveled two major legal criticisms at Prop. 8. The first is that the proposition is not merely an amendment to the state constitution, but a more severe "revision." Amendments can be made through the proposition system, but revisions can only be enacted by the state legislature or by constitutional convention. California Chief Justice Ronald George seemed to find this argument dubious, asking anti-Prop. 8 lawyers whether they felt that the right to gay marriage could be given by a proposition, rather than taken away. "Are you saying it is a one-way street," he asked, "that you can extend rights by way of initiative and take them away only by revision, the same rights?" And Justice Joyce Kennard argued that to call Prop. 8 a revision was to underestimate the legal power of California voters. "I think what you are overlooking is the very broad powers of the people to amend the Constitution," she said.

The second criticism of Prop. 8, advanced by State Attorney General Jerry Brown, is that the proposition repeals an "inalienable right" without sufficient justification. But justices countered that there was no obvious way to identify such inalienable rights. George mentioned the right to amend the state constitution, asking, "is that an inalienable right?"

Protesters from both sides gathered in San Francisco's Civic Center Plaza for the hearing. One supporter of Prop. 8 carried a sign reading, "Those who hate real marriage should not have the right to pollute it." On the other side were messages like, "The gay agenda . . . our hope . . . our prayer . . . our dream" and "The gay agenda: 1) Equality. 2) Shopping. 3) See #1." But if Prop. 8 is upheld, the real next step for its opponents will be campaigning for the recognition of existing gay marriages — and perhaps trying to get the state "out of the marriage business" entirely.

On the first point, it's hard to tell how the Court feels. Kennard said that Prop. 8 "said that only a marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized regardless of where or when performed," but that this requirement "was buried in the middle of the rebuttal argument." George said the language of the proposition might have been intentionally vague. And Justice Ming W. Chin questioned the ethics of revoking once-legal marriages, asking, "Is that really fair to the people who depended on what this court said was the law of the land?"

The second point, supported by an editorial in the LA Times, hinges on questions also posed by Chin:

What if the state merely licensed or just recognized private, contractual civil unions with all the benefits of marriage, and couples went to the religious or private institution of their choice to sanctify their vows? Would that resolve the legal differences between Proposition 8 and the state Supreme Court's 2008 ruling that gay and lesbian couples were entitled to the same marital rights as heterosexuals?

The Times thinks it would, and that since marriage is changing for both gay and straight people, it's time for the state to reevaluate its role. However, the editorial notes that such a reevaluation wouldn't be easy: "by the time Californians are ready to embrace such a seemingly novel idea, they will probably also be ready to vote for same-sex marriage."

California Supreme Court Looks Unlikely To Kill Proposition 8 [LA Times]
Loudly And Colorfully, Opposing Sides Debate Proposition 8 [LA Times]
A Way Out Of Prop. 8 [LA Times]
Gay Marriage: Is California's Supreme Court Shifting? [Time]

I grew up in New York, but during a time in which, it seemed, California was the place to be. Flicks like Valley Girl, Earth Girls Are Easy, Fast Times At Ridgemont High, Beverly Hills Cop, Troop Beverly Hills, Less Than Zero and The Lost Boys* offered up images of palm trees, malls, beaches and surfer slang. The Chili Peppers ruled, David Lee Roth's "California Girls" was on the radio, and the halls of my junior high reeked of Giorgio Beverly Hills, the scent all the older girls wore, like, for sure. Then came Beverly Hills 90210.

Steven Fenton, who is on the school board of BHH, says the idea to sell Beverly Hills High as a brand dates back to the orginal TV show, which aired from 1990 until 2000. At the time, the the school district declined to capitalize on the publicity. But now that they're short on cash (and there's a new 90210 on the air). Cue the Beverly Hills High sunglasses, scarves and corduroy tote bags. Ken Raasch, chief executive of Creative Brands, says:"Ultimately, Beverly Hills High School represents an aspirational lifestyle for people. Sunny days and palm trees, wide lawns and boulevards: the comfortable life a lot of people are hoping to have some day."

Some day? My Californiphilia was basically a phase, but the pre-teen in me would kill or die for a Beverly Hills High messenger bag.

Beverly Hills High School, The Brand [Forbes]

*click each flick to see a trailer!

Gay rights advocates note that gay hate crimes have been increasing recently. [MSNBC, NYPost]

Brown, who once said he would dismiss challenges to the measure, has apparently made a dramatic turn-around. "Upon further reflection and a deeper probing into all the aspects of our Constitution" Brown said, "It became evident that the Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative. Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote."

Yes on 8 supporters, including Attorney Kenneth Starr, were urging the Attorney General's office to uphold the measure by invalidating all gay marriages that took place before the ban, an act that Starr claims would be "about restoring and maintaining the traditional definition of marriage." Brown disagreed, noting that the Proposition itself did not have any language in it that specified invalidating marriages performed before the election.

In the end, Brown declared, in what is potentially a very important step towards overturning the measure: "Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification."

California Attorney General Jerry Brown Urges Repeal Of Proposition 8[Huffington Post]
Brown Asks State High Court To Overturn Prop. 8[San Francisco Chronicle]

Read more info about the incident and harassment that Muslim women face in America at the ACLU blog.

[via ACLU Blog Of Rights]

• The California Supreme Court this afternoon granted a hearing to the Prop 8 opponents' challenge to the ballot measure that eliminated same sex marriage rights in the state. It did not, however, issue a stay that would have allowed same sex marriages to continue. [Equality California, California Supreme Court (pdf)]
• Missouri finally finished counting its votes and has narrowly gone for McCain. Obama still gets to be President, though. [Politico]
• A judge has ruled that Al Franken's campaign is entitled to written reasons why certain absentee ballots were rejected, which is expected to help his efforts to oust Norm Coleman. I'd bet the voters whose votes were rejected would like to know that sort of thing, too. [Politico]
• But the Dow fell again, so we're all pretty well screwed for now no matter what. [Huffington Post]

• Not as screwed as the automakers, who aren't going to get their piece of the bailout pie, a quest that was not helped by Mitt Romney— the primary candidate who won Michigan by kissing their asses earlier this year — saying that they should be allowed to go bankrupt. [NY Times, NY Times]
• And the auto industry's favorite Democrat, Michigan Congressman John Dingell — who has been chairing the Commerce Committee to their benefit for 2 years — lost a preliminary vote to keep his Committee chairmanship to upstart Congressman Henry Waxman. So it's really been a shitty week for them so far. [Politico]
• But they are definitely not as screwed as Republican crackpot John Ziegler, who decided to give an interview about his crappy new poll that says all Obama voters are poorly informed to Jezebel Crush Object Nate Silver and ended up, in the face of Silver's superior brain, telling him, "Go fuck yourself." Don't mess with our man, John Ziegler. [FiveThirtyEight]
• In a fit of crazy, Michelle Bachmann blithely declared that she never said that thing about investigating Congress members for being un-American that everyone heard her say. [Politico]
• Even crazier is Joe the Motherfucking Plumber, who has an enormous crush on Sarah Palin. Hustler, are you listening? [Huffington Post]
• Nearly two weeks after it was first reported, Obama's people have confirmed that strategist David Axelrod will join his Administration as a senior adviser along with Greg Craig as White House counsel. [Reuters]
• Dick Cheney has been indicted — along with former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales — on state charges in Texas that his financial interests in Vanguard Group (which runs some prisons there) are tantamount to participating in that company's abuse of power. Don't get your hopes up: prosecutor Juan Guerra "has a history of launching eccentric court and political battles," as though that needed to be said. [The Telegraph]
• Republican Senator Arlen Specter announced today that he plans to fuck with presumed Obama AG nominee Eric Holder about his role in the Marc Rich pardon at the end of the Clinton Administration, as though any of his constituents care. Apparently, Specter is fully prepared to hop on the train to Crazy Partisan Town with the rest of the Republican Party and ignore his many years as a moderate that have helped him get reelected. [Politico]

• Obama's announced his transition team co-chairs — the folks that will help pave the way for his Administration, not a shadow Cabinet — and it includes John Podesta, Pete Rouse (Obama's Senate Chief of Staff) and Valerie Garrett. The advisory board to the co-chairs includes former EPA head Carol Browner; former Commerce Secretary William Daley; former transportation secretary Federico Peña; Obama national security adviser Susan Rice; and Governor Janet Napolitano. Don't expect to see those names on a future list of official appointments, though. [Washington Post]
• Obama's first official appointment will, however, be Congressman Rahm Emanuel. [NY Times]
• Four Senate races remain undecided: Alaska and Oregon are too close to call; Minnesota is likely to have an automatic recount; and Georgia's results require a runoff. [CNN]
• But, the anti-abortion "personhood" amendment in Colorado and the abortion ban in South Dakota went down by wide margins. [Denver Post, Argus Leader]

• By the way, when the state of Missouri elected Denise Juneau to be their superintendent of public instruction, they made her the first Native American woman in the state (and probably the first in the nation) to hold statewide office. Are there any other barriers we can bulldoze this week, please? [Missoulian]
• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave a press conference to state the obvious, which is that, since the economy sucks, Democrats are going to have to set and stick to priorities. Too bad she's spent the last two years proving she knows how to roll over. [Politico]
• Russian President Dmitry Medvedev went out of his way to prove Senator Joe Biden right, threatening to escalate a nuclear standoff with the U.S. in Eastern Europe if Obama moves forward with Bush's missile defense shield there. Cuban Missile Crisis anyone? Bueller? [Washington Post]
• They might be Bushies at heart — and partially responsible for the catastrophe that is the Iraq War and the potential new nuclear standoff for Russia — but electing our first African-American President choked up Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, too. [CNN, Huffington Post]
• More than 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Obama yesterday, but half of the married ones went for McCain. Can married women please fill the rest of us in on what changes with a ring? [US News & World Report]
• More than 130 million Americans turned out to vote yesterday, or about 64% of eligible voters, making it the biggest election ever and the higher voter turnout in a long damn time. [Politico]
• The ACLU, along with the Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, have filed a brief with the California Supreme Court arguing that it should rule Proposition 8 invalid if it officially passes. They argue that, since Prop 8 invalidates another section of California's constitution, it requires greater legislative scrutiny than the average ballot initiative. Good luck! [ACLU]