"I'm gonna knock you out
Mama said knock you out"

This kept popping into my head today while writing about the Government asking the Court to impose the maximum sentence on Joe Nacchio.

Atrios notes that we have 18 months to go in the national nightmare that has been the Bush Presidency. (And yes it does bring to mind the famous Onion headline.) He then reviews what he was writing about 18 months ago - silly Deborah Howell's awful performance on the Abramoff coverage, Joe Klein, of course, and one of many Iran scares we have been subjected to.

On the flip, I'll remember what I was writing about.

JetBlue has sure engaged in the strangest string of decisions one can imagine.

It all started when JetBlue provided free airline ticket vouchers to the YearlyKos convention. JetBlue was attacked by Bill O'Reilly. Jetblue responded to O'Reilly that it had only given free airline ticket vouchers for YearlyKos. O'Reilly trumpeted as a huge cave-in by JetBlue/Victory for Billo, even though nothing had changed.

Update [2007-7-20 18:4:45 by Big Tent Democrat]: Boy this Barger fellow is stupider than I thought:

. . . I personally have never condoned and abhor anything hateful towards anyone and am fully confident that JetBlue's crewmembers share this view. . . .

You believe Mr. Barger, that the Pope is NOT a primate? Are you as dumb billo?

More.

Whatever is going on in the world today, here's a place for you to discuss it. It's a court day for me, I'll be back here tonight.

It's a jail day for me which means an open thread day for you.

• Christy's got the latest on the impending Habeas vote.

• Markos of Daily Kos, on his way back from Greece, responds to Bill O'Reilly's attack on Yearly Kos.

• The 9th Circuit has limited the use of the sentencing guidelines firearm enhancement. Sentencing Law and Policy reports:

More...

(New York Times photo of Plame House )

Hear Ye, Hear Ye, the Yearly Kos Scooter Libby Live-Blogging Panel will soon be in session.

If you are attending Yearly Kos in Chicago, it's time to mark your calendars for opening day, August 2, at 9:30 a.m. You won't want to miss Firedoglake's esteemed co-hostess Christy Hardin-Smith and indispensable FDL contributor Marcy Wheeler of The Next Hurrah provide their behind-the-scenes look at live-blogging the perjury and obstruction of justice trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Also on the panel is Sheldon Snook, the Administrative Assistant to the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Sheldon (who goes by his nickname Shelly) was the court official in charge of news media at the Libby trial.

I'll be there as well, moderating the panel.

I'm sure I don't need to remind anyone, but I will anyway, that Firedoglake provided ground-breaking coverage of the trial. As the New York Times wrote:

More...

The Daily Kos FP on what John Yoo says and how this means President Bush can attack Iran without Congressional authorization:

[John Yoo wrote that] the AUMF is "an express affirmation of the President's constitutional authorities by Congress." Not an authorization to use force, then, but an affirmation. An affirmation of what? That the power to use military force exists independent of this (or any other) act of Congress.

John Yoo is, of course, full of it, as Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman explained:

BA: The president has to get another authorization for a war against Iran. It isn't up to Nancy Pelosi or the House to prevent him; he doesn't have the constitutional authority to just expand the war. He does not have the authority to unilaterally invade Iran.... Air strikes would be an invasion. It's an act of war of an unambiguous variety....On a major incursion into another large Middle Eastern country, I believe that, when push comes to shove, the president will once again request the explicit authorization of Congress. When he was contemplating the invasion of Iraq, he was in a much stronger position politically -- and he was still obliged to request authorization

More.

The latest Newsweek poll reflects what I think is becoming a winning frame for Democrats on Iraq:

Americans remain cautious about the prospect of a hasty withdrawal from Iraq, afraid it would leave the country in chaos. Out of four possible options in the poll, 19 percent of the respondents chose immediate total withdrawal. Slightly fewer (13 percent) don't want any cutbacks at all. Nearly a quarter of all Americans (24 percent) would implement a gradual withdrawal plan that would start in the fall and extend until the spring, when the last troops would come home. Forty percent favor keeping a substantial number of troops on the ground there, but only on the condition that they fall back to their bases and focus solely on training Iraqis and targeting Al Qaeda. . . .

40% favor keeping troops in Iraq as long as they are not engaged in combat in the Iraqi civil war. This is the packaging contained in almost all of the Democratic proposals, including Reid-Feingold (the difference in Reid-Feingold to other plans is that is relies on the Spending Power, the one truly effective way for Congress to stop Bush.) Add to this the 37% who favor immediate withdrawal or withdrawal by the Spring of 2008 and it seems clear to me that the baseline position that 77% of the country has taken on Iraq is the Democratic position. More.

The thoroughly discredited Fred Hiatt, leader of the Washington Post's Editorial Board, faces the abyss. To deny it, he attempts to argue that Senator Hillary Clinton agrees with his views but is afraid to say it loudly:

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton traveled to this crucial caucus state today to assure voters that she would keep U.S. troops in Iraq for the foreseeable future because "we cannot lose sight of our very real strategic national interests in this region." . . . [This] would have been an accurate, if incomplete, rendition of her long address on Iraq policy. That she wanted to go on the record with such a view, but didn't want voters to really hear it, says much about the current Washington bind on Iraq policy.

Actually this column, and the misleading nature of it, says much about the current bind DC Gasbags like Fred Hiatt are in. They are a discredited, much ignored group now. They strive to regain relevancy. Hiatt tries here by simply misleading his readers. More.

I'm going to take advantage of the great weather and then attack a massive amount of wiretap discovery for the rest of the day.

Here's an open thread where you can pick the topics.

In my bloggingheads conversation with Conn Carroll of the National Journal's Blogometer, I tried to explain my view of using Presidential politics to influence Iraq policy. I tried to emphasize that a savvy and issues oriented Netroots could push our Presidential contenders to lead on getting us out by endorsing, embracing and promoting the not funding approach, the only possible way to end it during Bush's tenure. I think Jerome Armstrong's post on Obama and not funding is very much in line with what I have tried to do as well:

The recent attack from Obama that was directed toward Clinton and Edwards over Iraq made me wonder about which of the two, between Obama and Edwards, might be perceived as having more credibility on ending the Iraq War. . . . [E]nding the war means cutting off funding of the war, and that's not been something that Obama has been in favor of, until just recently.

. . . Obama wants to make a preemptive differentiation that only he is prepared to be the Democratic nominee based on his original opposition to invading Iraq. It's as if Obama is trying to become the Dean of '08 in attracting those of us who were against this war from the beginning. But the comparison of Obama to Dean ends in 2003. Dean never supported funding of the war, Obama continually did until the most recent vote.

. . . I applaud the change made by Obama. It's the direction those of us who want this war ended want every Democratic politician to take, in an effort to end the war in Iraq. But the notion that Obama has some sort of special appeal over the issue of Iraq, to those of us who are actually paying attention, seems full of folly.

I hope Jerome is right because it is my wish to see our Presidential contenders be pushed to be leaders in the Not Funding movement. More.

Last year it seems to me MySpace was big. This seems to be the year for bloggers and Facebook.

Firedoglake has over 700 members. Christy has figured out how to put up her own page. Jane has one too.

Digby has a group. So does Yearly Kos.

They have inspired me to spend an absurd amount of time today updating the TalkLeft page and TalkLeft Group on Facebook. I haven't created a separate page for me, and instead put my stuff on the TalkLeft page.

As of now TalkLeft has only 17 friends and the TalkLeft group has only 8 members, a pretty paltry showing. If you're into Facebook, I hope you'll stop by and connect up with us. You can just click to join the TalkLeft group. I'm not sure how I add you as a friend.

Some questions for Facebook pros below: