Dodd still leading on issues, in this case, against FISA Telecom Amnesty:

Today, starting at around 10 am, the Senate Judiciary Committee will be revising and possibly voting on a new FISA law, as Matt Browner Hamlin previously mentioned. The issues at stake, as I'm sure you know, are twofold. First, Chris Dodd . . . believes that there should be no immunity for lawbreaking telecom companies that spied on American citizens starting before 9/11. . . . Second, the FISA legislation in its current form allows the government to obtain "umbrella warrants," which allow it to spy on a wide net of people. Dodd . . . believes this is unconstitutional . . .

It's a jail day for me -- all day -- I'll be back for the debate tonight.

This particular jail is built underground and there's no working wireless connection. It has the feel of being in star trek, between the identical uniforms of the jail guards and the high tech stations. There are underground tunnels with colored arrows on the concrete floors directing you to the next set of gated doors.The jail staff is very polite. The place is so efficient that processing takes about 3 minutes, then we're on our way into the bowels of the building. By the time we follow the yellow brick road to the right area, our clients are already seated, happy to see us.(Anything to get out of those cells for a few hours.).

For the rest of you, there's lots to talk about, from tonight's debate to Bernie and Rudy and Judy, from drivers' licenses to FISA and whatever else might be on your mind.

Enjoy. I'll look forward to reading the thread when I get home.

That was quick. Just yesterday I was criticizing the LAPD's plan to map Muslim neighborhoods.

It's already history.

A plan by the Lose Angeles Police Department to map out Muslim communities, a proposal that civil rights groups sharply criticized as racial and religious profiling, has been shelved, a police spokeswoman said. The department planned to have its counterterrorism bureau identify Muslim enclaves to determine which might be likely to become isolated and susceptible to ”violent, ideologically based extremism.”

Mary Grady, the spokeswoman, said: “There was a clear message from the Muslim community that they were not comfortable with it. So we listened.”

Good riddance.

Journalist Sidney Blumenthal has written his last column at Salon, explaining why he is leaving the magazine to join Hillary Clinton's campaign as a senior advisor.

(Speaking only for me)

This is a great and powerful moment for Senator Barack Obama:

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Il, is standing by his support for granting driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants, even after Gov. Eliot Spitzer, D-NY, abandoned the proposal amidst rising political opposition.

"Obama said in the debate he supported it and he's standing by it," an aide to the Senator told the Huffington Post. "He supported a similar bill in the state senate as a law enforcement measure."

Obama's backing stands in stark contrast to the position taken by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, whose campaign now cites the issue as a basic policy difference between the two Democratic frontrunners.

This is Barack Obama's finest moment in this campaign. And Senator Hillary Clinton's lowest. This is certainly a contrast moment and is the strongest evidence to date of the differences the two would bring to leading the country. I have said that if I were to vote today, I would vote for Barack Obama. Prior to this, it would have been a reluctant vote in his favor. Now it would be a proud vote for Obama. This is the promise he has shown now manifested in REAL leadership.

I'm disappointed to see that Hillary Clinton has now come out against drivers licenses for the undocumented.

Her advisers think this will take the issue "off the table." I think it opens her up to new attacks in tomorrow night's debate for being inconsistent.

She said at the last debate she wasn't particularly familiar with the proposals. I assume she is now. That's what makes her statement so disappointing. I thought that with more information on the issue, she would have seen the wisdom of the plan.

Drug War Rant and Hit and Run pick up on John McCain's recent statements on a blogger conference call about medical marijuana. The question posed was:

"Should federal law supersede the will of the people in a given state when it comes to medical marijuana?"

McCain's answer:

McCain started chuckling. "The will of the people, my friend, is that medical marijuana is not something that the quote 'people' want," he responded. "Certain people feel strongly about this issue, and they show up at most town hall meetings, obviously feel very strongly about it. There is no convincing evidence...there's evidence, but no convincing evidence to me that medical marijuana relief of pain and suffering cannot be accomplished by prescriptions from doctors... So, when you're talking about the will of the people, you're going to have to show me the will of the people besides the will of a small number of people who feel very strongly about the issue, as obviously you do."

More...

A McCain aide points out the problem with Rudy, Kerik, Judith Regan, et. al.

"Obviously there are some very serious charges involved for a guy who was his protégé and one of his closest friends. And for Rudy to go out and say this is not worthy of discussion when it directly involves him and his decision making, and in the case of department of homeland security, the security of our country - it's disturbing that Rudy would think it's not something he is going to have to address. "

And a Romney aide says:

"Voters grow very weary of story after story after story having to do with public officials who have not adhered to higher ethical standards," said Madden. "Right now it is very important to Republican primary voters that we have a candidate who can draw a very clear contrast between a Republican nominee and Hillary Clinton. If you have a nominee who is distracted by this type of narrative, you lose the ability to contrast yourself with Hillary Clinton and past Clinton administrations. It cancels out any advantage you would have."

Grits for Breakfast takes issue with New York Times columnist Bob Herbert over "states' rights." Big Tent Democrat weighed in here with an opposing view.

I'm with Grits for Breakfast. When I think "states' rights" I think of the alternative, which has resulted in the mass federalization of state crimes. As Grits says:

I'm horrified by the abuse of the Interstate Commerce Clause to justify federal regulation in areas where it has no business, transforming what was intended to be a limited federal government into a nearly all-powerful one.

I consider the federal War on Drugs and the expansion of federal prisons, law enforcement and immigration detention a direct spite to the separation of federal and state powers articulated in the Constitution.

More...

If Lawrence Lessig is right about the willingness of Senator Barack Obama to stand up to the Beltway Establishment, then here is a chance for him to prove it. Joe Klein writes:

There [is] . . . less cause--to cut off funding for the war than there were last Spring. A renewed campaign on the part of the hapless Democratic leadership to cut off the supplemental funds will only increase the public sense of Democratic futility. . . . Too much time, and political capital, has been wasted fighting Bush legislatively on the war. . .

Prove something to those of us who want the Iraq Debacle ended Senator Obama. Prove Lessig right. LEAD the fight to end the Iraq Debacle NOW. In the Senate. Tell Joe Klein he is wrong.

Kos writes about Lawrence Lessig's endorsement of Senator Barack Obama and I think both Kos' reaction and Lessig's endorsement are troubling in that they ask next to nothing of Obama while being too willing to embrace the false Media narrative regarding Hillary Clinton. Lessig writes:

But the part that gets me the most about Senator Clinton is the eager embrace of spinelessness. I don't get this in Democrats generally. I never have, but I especially don't get it after two defeats to the likes of George Bush (ok, one defeat, but let's put that aside for the moment). Our party seems constitutionally wedded to the idea that you wage a campaign with tiny speech. Say as little as possible. Be as uncontroversial as you can. Embrace the chameleon as the mascot.

Kos reacts:

Yeah, that pretty much sums up the problem with Hillary.

Assume that is true. Is anyone pretending it does not describe Barack Obama? To endorse an endorsement of Obama that, in its core argument, is an attack on failings that Obama possesses is ludicrous.

If people want more from Hillary's challengers, and by extension, more from Hillary, they simply can not let the Hillary challengers off the hook. Here both Lessig (who as a longtime friend of Obama's is not someone I am really looking to for an objective view of the candidates) and Kos (whom I expect better from), give Obama a free ride. We get the candidates we settle for. Here Kos and Lessig have settled for an Obama who has demonstrated the very flaws they condemn. It makes no sense.

A sensitive manual on Guantanamo detainees has been leaked.

The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. It is unclassified, but designated "For Official Use Only." It hit the web last Wednesday on Wikileaks.org.

What's Wikileaks?

The Pentagon has been resisting -- since October 2003 -- a Freedom of Information Act request from the American Civil Liberties Union seeking the very same document.

Anonymous open-government activists created Wikileaks in January, hoping to turn it into a clearinghouse for such disclosures. The site uses a Wikipedia-like system to enlist the public in authenticating and analyzing the documents it publishes.

As to the document itself, it's a layout of Camp Delta and its policies. The full, 237 page document is here.

[Hat tip to reader Scribe.]