Like many of their fellow congressional types, Kirsten Gillibrand and Joe Sestak are running for re-election. There are several Senate races out there too...some where Senate Dems might be able to pick up in-trouble GOP seats:

With 23 GOP seats up for grabs this year -- versus only a dozen Democratic seats -- Senate Democrats see a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pad their majority with as many as four to seven new seats.

This could be a great chance to get that solid majority in the Senate we've been discussing...that senators have claimed they need to "get stuff done."

Or, the actuarial argument.

Let's be clear:  the actuaries will tell you that electing McCain is a prescription for a Palin presidency, with all the trouble for your and future generations' rights and even survival that that entails.

It's not so much free speech under attack, as Freedom of Assembly.

Working solo, I've been able to fly signs right up to the gates where the delegates are searched before entering Excel. Anything that appears to be a group over 5, however, gets excluded from the perimeter.

Easiest access is by taxi. The police stereotype of bad demonstrator has you entering on foot.

During Mondays brawl by the river, I was directly behind the National Guard line, posing with my "This is a test of the Emergency Free Speech System" sign. The only police interference with my activity was an admonishment to "wait for the walk sign."

The SF Chronicle reports on corporate lobbyists taking advantage of a loophole in rules preventing them from throwing lavish parties to "honor"House lawmakers, which exempts parties for groups of Members.

Prominent, a Sunday evening bash thrown by ATT for the "Blue Dogs" to thank them for the FISA amnesty.

Lobbyist parties for lawmakers bend rules

Congress, pledging to clean up Washington's culture of corruption, approved a rule last year to end the practice of lobbyists or their clients throwing lavish events honoring lawmakers at the parties' national conventions.

But the House ethics committee opened a huge loophole in the rule by issuing guidelines in December saying it was fine for lobbyists or their employers to throw parties for a group of House members - just not for a single lawmaker...

...AT&T is among the sponsors of a party celebrating the conservative House Blue Dog Democrats on Sunday night.

Perfect spot for the first appearance of my "STOP GOVERNMENT SPYING" banner.

And it should be on yours - but not because of the obvious reason.  The real reason?

It's August, 1990 all over again.

And Bush and Cheney are cooking up another oil war to benefit the Republicans, the military-industrial complex and the oil industry.

On March 5th, dailykos denizen norahc (Ben Plunkett) obtained permits in the name of "Swift Students for Truthiness" from the St. Paul Parks Department for use of Hamm's Plaza for non-partisan issue oriented expressive activity on Sept. 3d and 4th, 8AM to 8PM. Planned, a "Shutdown Guantanamo Stop Torture" event the 3d, "Stop Government Spying" on the 4th, both starting at 4:00. I'm co-ordinating the "spying" event.

Hamm's is tiny, not much more than a traffic island, so the limit of 91 in attendance at any time was acceptable.

Yesterday, Ben received a Certified Mail from the Parks Department, dated August 5th, indicating that the permits had been revoked, offering alternative space at Ecolab Plasa or Mears Park, both much less visible. Hamm's is 2 blocks from the Convention site at the Excel Center, and faces the St. Paul Hotel, a major delegate hub. I've just lined up an attorney, we'll be seeking a Temporary Restraining Order directing that the Parks Dept. honor the original permit.

I'm sitting here at work (the day job) trying to get stuff done for day job and my students (aka the night job). But I took a small break and wandered over to Murder She Writes--a blog on mystery writing and so on.

And I was stopped short by the posted clipping:

(AP) A 53-year-old wife and mother fatally shot herself shortly after faxing a letter to her mortgage company saying that by the time they foreclosed on her house that day, she would be dead.

Police said that Carlene Balderrama used her husband's high-powered rifle to kill herself Tuesday afternoon, shortly after faxing the letter at 2:30 p.m.

The mortgage company called police, who found Balderrama's body at 3:30 p.m. The auction was scheduled to start at 5 p.m. and interested buyers arrived at the property in Taunton, about 35 miles south of Boston, while Balderrama's body was still inside, according to Taunton police chief Raymond O'Berg.

Police did not immediately release the name of the mortgage company. O'Berg said Balderrama's fax read, in part, "By the time you foreclose on my house I'll be dead."

    Sooner or later, if lawyers press a bullshi*ter hard enough, he's going to run headlong into his earlier lies.  I think we've reached this point in the Hamdan litigation.  It's not quite to the point of being legitimately able to ask "when were you lying, then or now?" (which I have done, to great effect, in cross-examination), but it's getting close.

    Today, the lawyers representing Hamdan filed a brief supporting their request for an injunction preventing the show trials in the Gitmo Military Commission kangaroo court from going forward, until Hamdan's habeas petition is heard and decided - particularly as regards the dubious constitutionality of a lot of the military commissions' procedure and substance.  Here's a good post on the issues.  But, you really should read the brief.  They ripped the government a new one - with a lot of good reason - and really ought to prevail.

The D.C. District Court should grant the injunction and forbid the Military Commission show trial of Hamdan from going forward.

His colleagues call him "Big Media Matt." That's because Matthew Yglesias is a respected voice of the liberal blogosphere. The 28 year-old Yglesias has accomplished much. He graduated magna cum laude, from Harvard, served as editor-in-chief at The Harvard Independent, and upon graduating, he became a writing fellow at The American Prospect. Yglesias began blogging in 2002, focusing on American politics, public policy, and foreign policy. Yglesias now writes for The Atlantic Monthly and blogs at the Atlantic blog.

More below the fold.

Jan Crawford Greenburg had a detailed piece online yesterday at abcnews entitled "Obama Sounding Like Thomas and Scalia?"   LINK  After pointing out Obama's agreement with conservative views of recent Supreme Court decisions regarding gun control and the death penalty, she then zeroes in on Obama's recent comments to Relevant Magazine regarding abortion rights [Link].

In a recent interview, Obama appears to back away from his long-stated positions on abortion (and a proposed federal abortion rights law he had co-sponsored), repudiate 35 years of accepted Supreme Court rulings on the issue and embrace a view on abortion restrictions that has been expressed on the Court only by Justices Thomas and Scalia.

Lately there has been a growing and increasingly loudly voiced call from some of the more extreme centrists and from the DLC itself pushing the idea that to win elections - the upcoming 2008 presidential election comes to mind for some strange reason - and gain power Democrats will have to move sharply to the right, and that liberals and progressives are dooming America to successive republican administrations.

Sunday morning, March 11, 2007 in "Where Is America's True Center?" David Sirota wrote that:

The purported proof of such an assertion by Democratic Leadership Council mouthpieces Elaine Kamarck and Bill Galston was this finding:

"In 2004, only 21 percent of voters called themselves liberal, while 34 percent said they were conservative. The rest, 45 percent, characterized themselves as moderate."

The Washington media joined with Kamarck and Galston in billing this as an extraordinary finding that proved once and for all that Democrats must become more "moderate" or "conservative" because so few voters labeled themselves "liberal."

In April 2008, Attytood asked Senator Obama if he as President would hold former Bush administration officials accountable by seeking prosecution for crimes committed.  Obama promised that he would review the information to determine whether an investigation was required; and, if officials knowingly violated existing laws, Obama indicated that he would pursue prosecution.  

Based upon Obama's standard, there should be an investigation and potential criminal prosecution of Bush and other officials for knowingly violating FISA. Bush has admitted publicly that he did not comply with FISA, which is a criminal offense.  

However, the FISA bill pending before the Senate may take this putative prosecution off the table by providing immunity to Bush while codifying his unitary executive theory.  In order for President Obama to keep his word that he would hold Bush officials accountable for clear, knowing criminal violations, Senator Obama needs to stop this FISA bill, or at least provide amendments which clearly eliminate any colorable argument of immunity for Bush.