Remember the six Imans who were removed from a U.S. Airways flight because they prayed together at the airport gate?

Six imams attending a conference in Minneapolis took time to pray at the gate before boarding a U.S. Airways flight to Phoenix. A passenger handed a note to a flight attendant pointing out the "6 suspicious Arabic men" on the plane. Disturbed by their "unsettling" behavior -- which apparently consisted of praying and asking for seat belt extensions -- the crew told the police that the imams needed to be removed. They were escorted from the plane in handcuffs and detained for five hours before authorities conceded that they posed no threat.

The Imans have sued U.S. Airways alleging discrimination.

When the men returned to the airport the next day, they said, the airline refunded their fare but refused to sell them another ticket.

More...

Actor Sylvester Stallone has been charged in Australia with illegally importing 48 vials of a hormone growth drug into Australia. He didn't declare the drug on his Customs form. Later, his hotel room and private jet were searched.

Stallone says,

It was just a minor misunderstanding. They were just doing their jobs. I just didn't understand some of the rules here."

Fair is fair, hats off to John Solomon (and coauthor Dan Eggen) for this story:

While it is unclear whether the documents, which were reviewed yesterday by The Washington Post, will answer Congress's questions, they show that the White House and other administration officials were more closely involved in the dismissals, and at a much earlier date, than they have previously acknowledged. . . . Administration officials have portrayed the firings as a routine personnel matter, designed primarily to rid the department of a handful of poor performers. But the documents and interviews indicate that the idea for the firings originated at least two years ago, when then-White House counsel Harriet E. Miers suggested to Sampson in February 2005 that all prosecutors be dismissed and replaced.

Good work from Solomon.

PFAW:

People For the American Way, which two years ago helped lead opposition to the confirmation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, today called for his resignation or removal as the first step toward holding the White House and Department of Justice accountable to the rule of law, and urged Congress to expand its oversight of the administration.

“Each scandal sheds new light on the Bush administration’s abuse of power, violation of Americans’ civil liberties, and contempt for the Constitution,” said People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas. “Our nation’s top law enforcement official is in the middle of it, showing greater fidelity to the political interests of President Bush than to the public interest and the rule of law.”

. . . Neas said these are just the most recent in a series of developments that demonstrate Alberto Gonzales has failed to live up to his oath of office and act as the people’s lawyer, not the President’s. “The Attorney General has demonstrated time and again that Americans can’t trust him—or this administration—to follow the law, or to uphold the Constitution,” said Neas. . . . It is in the nation’s best interest for the Attorney General to resign, and if he fails to do so, President Bush should remove him from office.”

And if not that, then the Congress should impeach him. Sign the petition.

Just my opinion, not that of Talk Left.

The lastest lie from the White House is that all 93 U.S. Attorneys were being considered for firing by the President for not appropriately investigating voter fraud. Today's New York Times, White House Said to Prompt Firing of Prosecutors, ¶ 2:

Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were not aggressively addressing voter fraud, the White House said Monday.

This is an absolute and utter sham.

In the case of the fired U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, it is almost the ultimate hypocrisy, short of the Iraq War, and every other lie the White House has told.  Tim Griffin, the replacement U.S. Attorney, has been implicated in voter fraud in the stolen Florida Presidential election in 2000.

Again speaking for me exclusively.

To hear some in the "Netroots" (Update [2007-3-13 13:6:21 by Big Tent Democrat]: A good point from Kos to me, Stoller is not the "Netroots" - though I think Stoller is a big part of the "Netroots") tell it, defunding the Iraq Debacle by the Dem Congress is pipe dream crazy talk. Here is Matt Stoller:

Respectfully, your pet solution is not THE ANSWER. There is no THE ANSWER. Strategy is actually putting out a set of parameters that actually map to reality, and the reality is that there is not the discipline in the party to do what you suggest . . .

For Stoller, defunding can not be done. At least not by Democrats. For Stoller, it takes REPUBLICANS to defund:

There's only one endgame for Iraq, and that's to force Republicans in Congress to recognize that it's their [behinds] on the line.

With all the cries of "foul" over the U.S. attorney firings, I think it might be helpful for readers to know just how U.S. attorneys are selected.

The job has always been a political plum. The U.S. Attorney is nominated by the President, based on recommendations from the Senators in the particular District. Almost without exception, the appointee is from the President’s political party. When a new President is elected, we get new U.S. Attorneys.

The Assistant U.S. Attorneys get to stay, under civil service rules. They can't be ousted because of political reasons.

The travesty of the current U.S. Attorney firing scandal is not that U.S. Attorneys are being replaced. That is expected after an election, such as the one in 2004. It's that it's happening in 2007.

More....

Every year when the March Madness brackets come out, the same brouhaha breaks out about Mid Majors vs. Big BCS Conferences.

This year it is Arkansas, Illinois, Purdue and Stanford standing in for the big conferences vs. Drexel, Appalachian State and a few others (interestingly Syracuse is complaining too this year, rather disingenuously imo - 10-6 in the Big East is not what it used to be because of unbalanced schedules).

The argument it seems to me is simple - by and large the 5th, 6th and 7th place teams in the big conferences will be better than the "deserving" mid major teams. The question is not that for me, it is whether the idea of having the tournament include lesser teams - the 14, 15 and 16 seeds are mostly from tiny conferences where the teams are almost certainly not worthy in conventional terms - extends to the 34 at large bids. But who has a beef here really? Let's think about it on the flip.

Again, speaking for me only.

Maybe not all the Netroots, but certainly this man:

. . . This bill makes the war illegal, which is just as unenforceable as defunding the war (which Bush can easily bypass with Enron-style accounting). There is $800B in that pot, and you know the money can be moved around.

Where does this man come up with this? How in heavens does it make it illegal? By saying so? Does it repeal the Iraq AUMF? No. This is pure and simple, ignorant arrant nonsense.

From Greg Sargent:

. . . Though the bill mandates withdrawal by Fall 2008 at the latest, it's going to be at least partly a disappointment to some House liberals. That's because language that was in earlier drafts that would have clipped funding after the deadline -- as opposed to merely declaring the war illegal -- has been taken out. House leaders will argue that the bill does do its job, because it declares the war illegal beyond a certain date. But liberal House sources say this removed language was critical in ending the war in practice, because it would enforce the war's end with the power of the purse rather than requiring a trip to court in hopes that judges will end the war.

Remember the Kosovo case Kucinich brought? A court case to end a war? Just pathetic. Let's see Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers sell this one.

This is simply horrible. Just horrible.

The Congress wants to hear from Rove:

Congressional committees are now demanding the testimony of President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, in the burgeoning investigation into the reasons behind the unusual firings of eight U.S. attorneys last year. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has helped lead the Senate Judiciary Committee's examination of the dismissals of the federal prosecutors, cited new reports connecting Rove to those who wanted to oust at least one of the U.S. attorneys. "There's an emerging pattern that is extremely disturbing and everyday the sanctity of U.S. Attorneys as neutral enforcers of law without fear or favor is diminished," Schumer said. "We will get to bottom of this."

We'll see if they subpoena Rove. I'm not that confident in our Leadership these days.

I've got some gut shots for the Final Four that will meet in Atlanta.

Florida out of the Midwest. Unless something strange happens, Florida seems to have the easiest region. TChris' team Wisconsin, has lost its center and its swagger. Frankly, their talent level seems a notch below the other top teams to me. While Alando Tucker is obviously very good, I think he is not as good as some want him to be - I think it is a function of talent problems for the Badgers. Neither Oregon nor Maryland seems threatening to Florida to me.

My other Final Four picks are Georgetown, UCLA and Texas A&M. For now. Discussion to come.