Speaking only for me of course

I have not been shy about the need to demythologize General Petraeus as the "honest broker" who will provide an independent assessment of the Surge. I wrote:

[T]his is not meant to doubt General Petraeus' integrity or competence. It is meant to treat him for what he is - not an infallible disinterested observer, but a soldier who believes he can accomplish an impossible mission and will view events in a manner that most favors that belief. This is to be expected from ALL human beings

What I must condemn is the use of the phrase "General Betrayus" by Move On in its ad today in the New York Times. This inexcusable use of the detestable Republican tactic of labelling those who disagree with you as "traitors" is something I have long objected to and I must, in good conscience, strongly condemn Move On's use of this deplorable tactic. Moreover, not only was this morally contemptible, it was political idiocy as the coverage of the ad clearly demonstrated. There is a way to take on the Petraeus myth. Glenn Greenwald demonstrated how to do it. And he is featured here showing how again:

Open Left has a petition you should sign.

Big Tent Democrat will be live-blogging Gen. Petraeus' testimony before Congress in other threads today.

For those of you who want to discuss other issues, here's an open thread.

Diary Rescue: Check out:

• Geekesque's diary, Obama to reboot his Iraq policy and rhetoric.

• Randinho (of Beautiful Horizens)'s diary, When Will They Learn Volume XX

• John Horse writing How Bush Used Lt Cmdr Speicher

Also check out the pix of some of your favorite bloggers partying in LA this weekend. Jane identifies them in comment #26.

I'll be waiting for Larry Craigs' plea withdrawal filing to hit the internet so I can parse it and give my opinion.

Media types are busy speculating who Al Gore will endorse in 2008. He has said he expects to make an endorsement before the primaries.

No one expects Gore to endorse Hillary. I suspect he will endorse Obama, who has been campaigning for his endorsement (as have John Edwards and Chris Dodd. Neither Hillary, Biden nor Richardson have met with Dodd.)

In 2004, Gore endorsed Howard Dean. A month later, Dean was history.

Does Gore's endorsement matter? As much or more than Oprah's?

If you're by a computer today and have something to say, here's a place.

If you'd like to post a diary, cross-posting is fine,I'll be back later to add a link here. Basic rules for diarists are here. If you don't yet have "diarist" status on TalkLeft, send me an e-mail and I'll adjust your permissions.

From the past few days:

• Take the damn ball, Obama by Geekesque

• Gore Says Yes On Protests: Study Shows Effectiveness by Patriot Daily

What I'm thinking about today: Oprah's fund-raising for Obama. Does she have enough clout to sway an election? What do you think?

Law.com has a long article today on Google's hiring practices when it comes to in-house lawyers.

Finding the right sort of lawyer to fit Google's playful ethos yet steely business sense is -- judging by the army of recruiters assigned to the job -- a challenge. This is not due to a lack of any interest on the part of candidates, according to Jones, but because it takes a very particular sort of person to fit the Google mould.

....Prospective Google lawyers can expect up to 15 interviews, including one with one of the company's founders, as a final hurdle before getting the job.

Over the past year, Jones, who reports to U.S.-based general counsel Kent Walker, has conducted a lengthy search for new members of the team and is now hunting for the right lawyers for Google's Amsterdam, Madrid, Zurich, Milan and Moscow arms, establishing a legal function in all these major European cities.

A few months ago I wrote about the Google hiring perks and checked their website. I couldn't find a single job, legal or otherwise, I was remotely qualified for. Maybe you'll have better luck.

atrios liked this from Stoller:

Also, while I'm doing a bit of ranting, stupid articles on what the 'netroots' does or does not do, such as this one, or this one, to take but two examples, that ignore the fact that no top-tier Democrat differs from Clinton on Iraq, are really really stupid. . . . [T]he blogosphere is [not] some top-down organization with centralized management that controls the Democratic party leadership rather than a network of people with somewhat highly trafficked websites held in mild disdain by most Democrats on the Hill with any decision-making authority or useful information. Although to be fair to the previous two really stupid articles, the latter two stupid articles were pretty stupid.

(Emphasis supplied.)

I wrote one of the "stupid" articles referenced. I think Stoller missed my point. I could not care less if the Netroots unites behind any Presidential candidate or blasts away at Hillary. Stoller defends himself by saying Hillary should be opposed (I guess.) He may be right but that is not my beef. Indeed, my complaint has been that the Netroots spends too much time talking about the 2008 presidential election and not enough time talking about the issues of 2007. In fact, I wrote:

Kudos to Markos and Daily Kos. The FEC issued an important ruling today, finding that blogs are media and like all media since 1974, media activity has been explicitly exempted from federal campaign finance regulation:

The Federal Election Commission announced today that it has unanimously resolved two complaints alleging that Internet blog activity is subject to Commission regulation, finding that the activity is exempt from regulation under the media or volunteer exemption.

In Matter Under Review (MUR) 5928, the Commission determined that Kos Media, L.L.C., which operates the website DailyKos, did not violate the Federal Election Campaign Act. The Commission rejected allegations that the site should be regulated as a political committee because it charges a fee to place advertising on its website and it provides “a gift of free advertising and candidate media services” by posting blog entries that support candidates. The Commission determined that the website falls squarely within the media exemption and is therefore not subject to federal regulation under the Act.

More...

(Photo of Haymarket Square, Chicago, 1886)

Blawg Review has a Labor Day Special Historical Edition. Here's the criminal law bloggers section.

Diary Rescue: Thanks to Edger and Andgarden for posting these new diaries:

• Can The Iraq Occupation Be Ended Before The 2008 Elections?

• "Odd Couple" or Ineffective Couple?

This may be the best Keith Richards compilation I've seen yet. I can't believe he was ever that young. Watch the whole thing.

Who cares what one critic in Sweden thinks?

Bump and Update: For those of you hanging out online this weekend, here's a new open thread.

And don't forget we're seeking new diarists this weekend.

We have three new diaries today, two written by AndGarden and one by Denver journalist Dave Cullen, all well worth reading.

• Still Blackmailing Homos
• The House, Not the Senate Will Win the War
• Matt Bai, Michiko Kakutani, and the Netroots

Please read them, and if you like them, hit the "recommend button."

TalkLeft is seeking new diarists this week. Details here.

More....

Inspector General Glenn Fine has responded by letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy and informed him that his office is investigating whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was truthful during his Senate testimony about the firing of U.S. Attorneys, the warrantless surveillance program and other issues.

Senator Leahy has issued this response:

"I am pleased that Department of Justice Inspector General Glenn Fine will look into my concerns about potentially false, misleading or inappropriate testimony by the Attorney General. I look forward to the Inspector General's findings on the unprecedented firings of nine United States Attorneys, the improper political hiring of career officials within the Justice Department, the misuse of National Security Letters, and the efforts to bypass the Department's finding that a warrantless surveillance program was without legal basis.

More...