Freedom loving:

Police fired tear gas and clubbed thousands of lawyers protesting President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's decision to impose emergency rule, as Western allies threatened to review aid to the troubled Muslim nation. Opposition groups put the number of arrests at 3,500, although the government reported half that.

Musharraf, who took power in a 1999 coup and is also head of Pakistan's army, suspended the constitution on Saturday ahead of a Supreme Court ruling on whether his recent re-election as president was legal. He ousted independent-minded judges, put a stranglehold on independent media and granted sweeping powers to authorities to crush dissent.

. . . Musharraf said Monday he would relinquish control of the military and return the country to "the same track as we were moving" but he gave no indication when the vote would take place.

"I am determined to remove my uniform once we correct these pillars — the judiciary, the executive, and the parliament," Musharraf was quoted by state-run Pakistan Television as telling foreign ambassadors Monday. . . .

They hate us for our freedoms. See also Devil's Tower's great post.

Atrios gets this utterly wrong:

It's also clear that there are factions that are very wedded to the "what Democrats need to do" literature because they're interested not in simply winning elections but in remaking the Democratic party in their image. For some the 2006 election win was premature as the Democrats won without massively repositioning themselves, proving it was possible.

First, I hope all Dems are interested in remaking the Democratic Party in their image. Is that not why we care so much? The issues? The substance? The ideology? We want to transform the Democratic Party. I think it is perfectly fair for those who disagree with any particular view (Atrios means the DLC types here) to try and do the same thing. Let the debate rage on.

Second, the Democrats very much remade their image in the 2006 election. They became the anti-Iraq War Party. It is why they won. The Dems massively repositioned themselves. That they have failed to stick to their guns is another matter. But in 2006, the Dems fought against the war and stood up to Rove's "cut and run" nonsense.

I'm not quite ready to drive down the mountain yet. Until I get home tonight, here's an open thread for you. And a picture of the peacock who lives in the house I'm staying at.

I see there's a new attack on the Eagles' new album for promoting fear about global warming and not attacking islamo-fascism.

There's a Wal-Mart in Glenwood Springs I have to pass on the way to I-70. I think I'll stop in and buy it for the ride home and see for myself.

And it is the bad kind of doubletalk:

John Edwards on Sunday said he opposes a new program in New York to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but the Democratic presidential candidate offered much the same plan for establishing a licensing system as his chief rival and party primary frontrunner, Hillary Clinton.

So much for the straight talk. And note this is a xenophobic flip flop from Edwards' 2004 position:

The former North Carolina senator, who unequivocally supported issuing driver's licenses to illegals when he was running for vice president in 2004, said that it should be up to the states to decide whether to issue licenses to illegals.

Read the doubletalk:

Mediation talks failed, the writers are on strike.

One of the sticking points: How much the writers should be paid when their shows are sold over the internet.

The question now is no longer whether or when they will strike, but how long a walkout will last and how much pain it will inflict.

Both sides are girding for what many believe will be a long and debilitating strike, potentially more disruptive than the 22-week walkout by writers in 1988, which cost the entertainment industry an estimated $500 million.

This is what it has come to:

The top legal adviser within the US state department, who counsels the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, on international law, has declined to rule out the use of the interrogation technique known as waterboarding even if it were applied by foreign intelligence services on US citizens.

Let's be clear. Until the Bush Administration, there has been NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that waterboarding was torture and a violation of American and international law. What is the issue now? The issue is the Bush Administration authorized waterboarding. The Bush Administration committed war crimes. So now, to try and save themselves from this fact, they will accept the torture of Americans. Truly the most disgraceful Administration in history.

Actually, most of what Joe Wilson says about Obama is right. But his defense of Hillary's vote of Kyl-Lieberman is wrong. First the part that is right:

. . . During the debate, Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois deleted reference [in K-L] to "military instrumentalities" and added: "Nothing in this Act should be construed as giving the president the authority to use military force against Iran." . . . Senator Barack Obama was absent when the vote on Kyl-Lieberman was taken, though that has not prevented him from criticizing colleagues who participated in the debate and voted for it. He has also opted not to sign the letter to the president. . . . Senator Obama's criticism of the vote and refusal to join with his Democratic colleagues on the letter to the president appear to be based more on the politics than the substance. The entire Senate was notified a day beforehand about the vote on the Kyl-Lieberman resolution. If he truly had a sense of urgency on the issue he should have made a point of participating in the debate and voting, when he would have had the opportunity at the time to air his substantive disagreement with his home state colleague Senator Durbin, rather than waiting to raise the issue afterwards in a purely political context and using it as a campaign tactic.

All very true. But where Wilson is dead wrong is in the belief that there was any positive merit to K-L. The simple fact is the Bush Administration can not be trusted on anything or at any time. These are not normal times where the Congress can work with the President on such issues. The Congress' main job now is to be vigilant and oppose the Bush Administration's belligerent impulses on foreign policy. It needs to make sure no more damage is done. K-L hurt that effort. Clinton was very wrong to vote in its favor.

Geekesque rightly points out that this from Wilson was simply awful:

He has also made clear that for him the paramount enemy is George W. Bush, not an organization that has a history of involvement in terrorism and has been actively targeting American troops in Iraq.

Shame on you Joe Wilson.

Disgraceful. How bad can CNN get? I am with Digby:

I just saw Jeanne Moos do one of her cute little feature stories on ... waterboarding. Lots of adorable stories of people trying it and timing themselves and laughing about it afterwards. Funny, funny stuff. I only wish they'd put her in a stress position for 48 hours naked so we could see how hilarious that is too.

Truly outrageous.

Frank Rich correctly rips Hillary Clinton for voting in favor of the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment. But he fudges the facts on the performance of the other Presidential contenders. In particular, he gives Barack Obama's failure to vote on K-L a pass. Rich writes:

This time around, with the exception of Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic candidates seem to be saying what they really believe rather than trying to play both sides against the middle. Only Mrs. Clinton voted for this fall’s nonbinding Kyl-Lieberman Senate resolution, designed by its hawk authors to validate Mr. Bush’s Iran policy. The House isn’t even going to bring up this malevolent bill because, as Nancy Pelosi has said, there has “never been a declaration by a Congress before in our history” that “declared a piece of a country’s army to be a terrorist organization.”

I am starting my own contest, the Maureen Dowd Substance Watch. No, not substance abuse. Substance. Please identify the last time she discussed an actual issue. For the second column in a row, I do not see any.

Come on girlfriend, at least find an issue to attack Hillary on. It takes a lot of gall to write about politics and not actually know anything about any issue.

I've decided to spend my extra hour driving to the mountains. If I don't turn my clocks back till I get there, I'll make it to Aspen in 2 1/2 hours instead of 3 1/2. Pretty cool.

What are you doing with your extra hour?

Here's an open thread to discuss what's in the news, on the blogs or on your mind.

Question: How can bloggers support the writers' strike? If federal mediation attempts fail today, it starts tomorrow. 300 strike captains are ready to go. Why? It's the money.

Guild members are being asked to sign up for a shift beginning at 9 a.m. or 1 p.m. and will be given signs, chants and red T-shirts emblazoned with "United We Stand" when they arrive on site, captains said. Each member is expected to picket four hours every day. Of the guild's 12,000 members, about 8,000 are in WGA West, with the remainder in WGA East, which plans to picket in New York.

Many of the members will picket outside the studios in which the shows they were working on are made, while others will be assigned to locations based on where they live.

The Writers Guild of America (West) site is here.

Okay, that's my Sully recognizing name for Kevin Drum's Worst Blog Post of All Time Contest:

All-Time Wingnuttiest Blog Post Contest (Choose up to 5)

Ann Althouse: "Let's take a closer look at those breasts."

. . . MORE