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:

Happy 5th blogiversary to Skippy the Bush Kangaroo. Skippy has made me smile with his unique writing voice all that time.

His blogiversary post reads like a Who's Who of the liberal blogosphere, so go on over and read it and check out the many blogs mentioned.

Congrats, Skippy, you've been a great blogosphere friend . I wish you many more great blogging years and hope you hit that 2 million mark soon.

In other blogging news, Heretik is doing a great job with Mike's Blog Roundup at Crooks and Liars. For those interested in the mechanics of blogging (such as the change-over of many individual blogs to group blogs and the concept of short head vs. long tail blogs) Chris Bowers explains all at the new blog Open Left in a post he titles, New Establishment Rising? The End Of the Flat Blogosphere

Arianna writes that Democrats can't wait for GOP'ers to defect to act to end the war.

Let's make this an open thread.

The House Judiciary Committee has announced the list of witnesses for Wednesday's hearing on "The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials.

Via TP Muckraker and Sentencing Law & Policy:

• Ambassador Joseph Wilson
• Roger Adams, US Department of Justice Pardon Attorney
• Douglas A. Berman, William B. Saxbe Designated Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University
• Tom Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Middle District of North Carolina (Attorney for [sic] Vincent Rita, Rita v. US)
• David Rifkin, partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP, former Justice Department official during the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations.

TP Muckraker quotes Rep. John Conyers on the purpose of the hearing:

"Congress must now look into presidential authority to grant clemency, and how such power may be abused. Taken to its extreme, and possibly in the case of the Libby clemency, the use of such authority could completely circumvent the law enforcement process and prevent credible efforts to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch."

While I'm pleased Joe Wilson and Prof. Berman, who writes the excellent Sentencing Law & Policy blog are going to be witnesses, I'm concerned that the committee will not be hearing from anyone involved in the Libby commutation process.

There was no clemency petition, the Pardon Attorney was kept out of the loop and I just don't see how these witnesses will shed any light on whether Bush's motive for granting the clemency was proper or improper.

More...

Say hello to Matt Stoller, Chris Bowers and Mike Lux' new blog, Open Left.

It already has a thumbs up from Digby and Jane Hamsher.

What's it about? Matt Stoller explains here.

Mostly, its "trying to bring progressive activists and professionals from 'inside' and 'outside' the political establishment into regular, thoughtful, and active connection with one another."

I'm all for that, go on over and check it out.

Between Live Earth and blogging, I barely left the computer or the house all weekend. So, you're on your own today. This space is for you.

If you want to see me discuss politics with The Hotline's Blogometer's Conn Carroll, take a look here. - btd

Yesterday, President George Bush turned 61. The Dalai Lama turned 73.

Bush celebrated by going to Camp David.

Via Moderate Voice, Craig Johnston says:

“Two men born on the same day, George Bush and the Dalai Lama.

“One who forgoes all thoughts of self to set the Wheel of the Dharma in motion, dedicates his existence to saving all life from suffering.

“The other, seemingly ethically mute to thoughts of peace and the fortunes of mankind; acts as an axis around which evil conspires.

Karma. Hopefully, what goes around comes around.

[Animated graphic here.]

The ACLU responds to the Sixth Circuit's dismissal of its lawsuit over the NSA warrantless electronic monitoring program.

The decision is here (pdf.)

Big Tent Democrat weighs in here. Also check out Think Progress.

I'm busy day-jobbing today.

What are you reading and thinking about today? (Please remember to put any urls in html format because long ones skew the site.)

This brings us to the second enquiry; which is . . . [i]f he has a right, and that right has been violated, do the laws of his country afford him a remedy?

The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws, whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation, if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal right.

-Marbury v. Madison

One of the great ironies of the seminal case Marbury v. Madison is that it provided no remedy to the party, Marbury, whose vested right was deemed by the Court to be violated. Chief Justice Marshall struck down a law passed by Congress which purported to give jursidiction to the Supreme Court over actions such as Marbury's, ruling that the law was unconstitutional.

Today, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, dismissed the ACLU's case against the National Security Agency, which sought the enjoining of the NSA's warrantless surveillance program. The Sixth Circuit ruled that the ACLU lacked standing and thus dismissed the case. More.