Barack Obama said:

I have concerns about cutting off funding . . . I think there is a possibility, given how obstinate the Administration is, that if we try to cut off funding, Bush is hellbent on doing what he is doing . . . he may decide to play chicken and say 'you guys do whatever you want [I'm keeping the troops there]' . . .

John McCain said:

When the President vetoes . . . I hope Democrats in Congress will heed the advice of . . . Senator Obama, and immediately pass a new bill to provide support to our troops in Iraq without substituting their partisan interests for those of our troops and our country.”

Obama replied:

Hillary Clinton has come out swinging against Don Imus. Her campaign sent out this alert:

She has started an initiative on her website encouraging people to show their support for the young women of Rutgers (note: people who send messages do not get signed up for the campaign email list unless they opt in).

After praising the women of the Rutgers' team, she writes:

Don Imus's comments about them were nothing more than small-minded bigotry and coarse sexism. They showed a disregard for basic decency and were disrespectful and degrading to African Americans and women everywhere.

Please join me in sending the young women of Rutgers a message of respect and support. Show them that we are proud to stand with them and for them."

Question: Will she refuse to appear on his show? Here's her quote:

Hillary Clinton said, "I've never been asked to go on the show and I've never wanted to go on his show...and I certainly don't ever intend to go on his show."

Via DavidNYC at Daily Kos: How out of touch is Rudy Giuliani? He doesn't even know the cost of a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread.

"A gallon of milk is probably about a $1.50, a loaf of bread about a $1.25, $1.30," he said.

A check of the Web site for D'Agostino supermarket on Manhattan's Upper East Side showed a gallon of milk priced at $4.19 and a loaf of white bread at $2.99 to $3.39. In Montgomery, Ala., a gallon of milk goes for about $3.39 and bread is about $2.

On Don Imus, Rudy says he'll still go on his program.

"I would appear on his program again, sure. I take him at his word," Giuliani said.

On the confederate flag,

Asked about the flying of the Confederate flag in some Southern states, Giuliani said, "That's a good "That's a good thing to be left on a state-by-state basis."

That's kind of like his revised abortion stance, it should be left up to the states. Will he take the same position on medical marijuana, and if elected, tell the Department of Justice not to raid co-ops or bust medical users in states that have legalized medical pot? I bet not. States' rights for some but not for all, right Rudy?

See also C&L.

The evidence:

Q: If George W. Bush vetoes the legislation, do you think Congress should pass another version of the bill that provides funding for the war without any conditions for troop withdrawal, or should Congress refuse to pass any funding bill until Bush agrees to accept conditions for withdrawal?
Fund the war without conditions: 43%
Withhold funding until Bush signs: 45%
Don't know: 12%

I am more moderate than the American People - I support the Reid-Feingold bill, which calls for funding to a date certain, March 31, 2008.

Here is WaPo/Fred Hiatt on Imus:

NEW YORK radio host Don Imus is an equal-opportunity insulter. He called noted African American journalist Gwen Ifill a "cleaning lady." He called a columnist at the New York Times a "quota hire." He's labeled Vice President Cheney a "war criminal." But none of those comments has landed Mr. Imus in as much hot water as the offensive, racist and sexist remarks he made last week about the women's basketball team from Rutgers University.

Called Gwen Ifill "a cleaning lady." Called the great Bill Rhoden a "quota hire." Called Cheney a "war criminal." One of these things is not like the others.

Isn't it amazing that Hiatt would equate what Imus said about Ifill and Rhoden to what Imus said about Cheney? How far up the Neocons' behinds has Hiatt placed his head?

It's one thing to make fun of politicians or journalists as liars and weasels; we're in the public arena and fair game. A group of hardworking student athletes isn't. They didn't do anything to warrant being slimed.

Um, racism and sexism directed at ANYBODY is the problem Howie the Shill. See? You are fair game but I do not get to hurl racial or ethnic slurs at you. Understand yet? What is it with WaPo? Are they this dense?

Please go away Gonzo, so says an LATimes poll of the American People:

Most Americans believe Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales should resign because of the controversy over his office's firing of federal prosecutors, and a big majority want White House aides to testify under oath about the issue, the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll has found. The survey, conducted Thursday through Monday, found that 53% said Gonzales should step down [36% say he should not]

Here's the reason why Gonzo will be gone after the 17th:

Senate and House Democratic leaders have asked White House aides to testify under oath about the firings, in part to answer questions about the roles of Gonzales and Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political strategist. Bush has rejected those requests, but the poll found that 74% of the public believes his aides, including Rove, should comply.

The string has been played and Rove matters more than Gonzo to Bush. To resist testifying, Bush will neeed to serve up Gonzo. Then the Media can start the wankery, saying "enough, no more witchhunts." Richard Cohen is already warming up for that.

Move On had its virtual town hall meeting last night. John Edwards won the Big Tent Dem sweepstakes, with the caveat that he still has not endorsed Reid-Feingold. How did the others do? Let's take a look. Here's my description of part of Hillary's answer:

There are two ways of thinking about this, what to do when Bush is President and what to do when a new President is in office. For the present, Hillary discusses her own bill, a bill that places conditions and benchmarks on funding, among other things. As for what is going on now, Hillary said this Congress was elected to end the war and bring the troops home. However, to do this Republican support is necessary. . . .

I stop here because this is the wrong answer. Democrats can end the war without Republican support. What is required is the courage to announce a date certain when DEMOCRATS will no longer fund the Iraq Debacle. Hillary is not for ending the war because she has placed an impossible condition on ending the war, garnering sufficient Republican support. That will not happen. There is one way to end the war while Bush is President -- do NOT fund it after a date certain. The Reid-Feingold bill need not pass in order to end the war. Democrats need only abide by its provisions.

Tomorrow appears to be the day the North Carolina Attorney General's office will announce its decision on whether to drop or proceed with sexual assault charges against the three former Duke lacrosse players.

Smart money says the case will be dismissed. Two of the defendants, Reade Seligman and Colin Finnerty traveled to Durham today, and the press is swarming around.

Question: If the charges are dropped because of lack of evidence or because the accuser won't cooperate, what should be the remedy for the boys? Their lives -- and that of their families -- have been turned upside down and into a hell for the past year. Their schooling has been interrupted, their reputations trashed.

Duke's reputation has taken a hit. The lacrosse team season was cancelled. Unpleasant racial issues surfaced.

I put much of the blame for this travesty of a case on D.A. Mike Nifong. If he hadn't glommed on to the media and made outrageously inappropriate comments in the beginning, jumping to the support of the accuser before the facts were in, much of the damage could have been avoided.

I think the State Bar will hold him accountable, but it still can't undo the damage.

Update: I'll be live-blogging the AG's press conference in a new thread. Or, you can watch it on your computer's here.

John Edwards tonight at the Move On event:

. . . President Bush has promised to veto that funding, calculating that he can use the bully pulpit to intimidate Congress and get them to back down.

But this is not the time for political calculation, this is the time for political courage. This is not a game of chicken. This is not about making friends or keeping Joe Lieberman happy. This is about life and death—this about war. We are done letting George Bush manipulate the rhetoric of patriotism, only to use our troops as political pawns. If Bush vetoes funding for the troops, he's the only one standing in the way of the resources they need. Nobody else.

Congress must stand firm. They must not write George Bush another blank check without a timeline for withdrawal—period. If Bush vetoes the funding bill, Congress should send another funding bill to him with a binding plan to bring the troops home. And if he vetoes it again, they should do it again.

The American people are overwhelmingly in favor of ending this war. If our side stands firm, if we show courage now, we can finally bring our troops back home and bring this war to an end.

Some adverstisers on Don Imus' radio show are pulling their ads.

Among them: Proctor & Gamble and Staples.

"Based on recent comments that were made on the show, it prompted us to kind of take a look at our decision to advertise and as a result we decided to stop advertising on that program," said Staples spokesman Paul Capelli said.

Cincinnati, Ohio-based P&G also withdrew its sponsorship. "Effective Friday, April 6, we pulled all P&G's brand advertising from the MSNBC daytime rotation," said P&G spokeswoman Jeannie Tharrington. P&G would not advertise again "until we can evaluate the Imus situation fully," she said.

On the fence: Bigelow Tea.

Update: The Washington Post reports Bigelow Tea will also pull its ads.

As always, speaking for me only.

Via Yglesias, Eric Alterman describes in stark terms what the MSM punditry dislikes about blogs:

Back in the pre-Internet days of yore, political punditry was the best job in journalism and one of the best anywhere. You could spout off on anything you wanted, and almost nobody would call you on it, much less find a place to publish and prove you wrong. . . . The advent of the Internet--particularly the blogosphere--has changed all that. Now, not only are the things pundits say and write preserved for posterity; there are legions of folks who track pundit pronouncements, fact-check their statements and compare them with previous utterances on the same and similar topics. . . .

All true, and brilliantly stated. But I worry about the same type of process happening with the blogs. Most Left bloggers are indeed quite good. Some, like Digby and Glenn Greenwald, are consistently brilliant. But no one should be immune from questioning and disagreement. I hope we can avoid the logrolling nature that became, and still is, the MSM punditry.

More...

It's been a busy day in PurgeGate. The House, frustrated with Alberto Gonzales and the Justice Departments pussy-footing over document turnover, has issued a subpoena for more of them.

The department has released more than 3,000 pages of e-mail messages and other files. But, the senators wrote in a letter to Mr. Gonzales, “We are concerned that additional documents relevant to the committee’s investigations are missing or have been withheld.”

What's missing?

More...