Congressman John Conyers came to New Haven yesterday to help kick off five days of intense grassroots campaign work for Barack Obama's presidential campaign.  Speaking to an overflow crowd at the African-American Center, the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee reminded us of the importance of the task ahead and provided an update on where we stand as far as holding the Bush administration accountable for its lawlessness.

Details after the jump.

Because deep in my heart, I do believe . . .

Tunes after the jump.

It's understandable that there's been a lot of talk comparing Senator David Vitter's woes to those that plagued President Clinton at the end of his second term.  After all, when Vitter arrived in Washington, DC as a congressman, it was the height of our National Fellatio Crisis.  Vitter promised to help clean up the nation's capital and he joined congressional Republicans as they bravely pursued impeachment proceedings against Clinton for false testimony he had given with respect to an illicit sexual relationship that had tarnished the honor and dignity of the Oval Office.

Now we learn that there have been incidents in which Senator Vitter has himself engaged in behavior that some say is similar to the behavior the Senator once said should have occasioned President Clinton's resignation.  Some Democrats have even suggested that, based on the principles he purported to hold dear, Vitter should now resign his office.  But something in the comparison just stuck in the Ol' Houndcat's craw.  The two situations seemed different to me, though I couldn't articulate why.  It was time to call in an expert.  I pass along her helpful analysis after the jump.  

The plaintiff who has sued Media Matters, using as his nom de guerre "Anthony 'Andy' Martin" (described in this recommended dkos diary) is also known as Anthony Martin-Trigona, one of the truly great vexatious litigators in a nation not known for its shortage of vexatious litigation.  When I first heard of him, at the beginning of my legal career, he was legendary.  Join me after the jump and I'll try to impart some of the flavor of Martin-Trigona's career, some of the activities that have lead otherwise valiant members of the legal profession to speak his name in whispers.

Man, this makes the Obama MySpace kerfluffle look like, well, a kerfluffle.

To the extended text!!

There's a comment in the thread about Wes Clark's ad for Ned Lamont that should hit us all about as hard as a heart attack.  Prose of Sharon writes: "I have no doubt in my mind Bush will be convinced by Rove that they can kill two bird with one stone.  Appease the critics of Rumsfeld, and give the appearance of bipartisanship with an accompanying scold of the Dems by appointing Lieberman as the new Secy."

I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but this one is so obvious we should be ashamed for missing it.  I'll go farther than Prose of Sharon.  In fact, I'll go past the jump.  Come on over.

John Edwards came to town (New Haven, CT, that is) yesterday to support Ned Lamont.  There were at least two events on the Edwards/Lamont agenda: A public rally at Yale-New Haven Hospital, superbly reported by Mbair in this diary (with video, no less!!) and a private, invite-only, mostly for trial lawyers, hush-hush cocktail fundraiser at the exclusive Quinnipiack Club.  (Yes, that's the same Quinnipiac - no k - that gave its name to the pollsters, but other than taking their names from the same mighty river, the Club and the poll, there's no connection between the two.)  Because the other diary covers the public rally so extensively that, after the jump, I'll just comment briefly on that.  I'll provide more detail, tedious and irrelevant as it may be, about the later event.

In a new column available at the right-wing site Real Clear Politics, George Will sets a trap for Al Gore.  I'm more than reasonably certain that Gore will refuse to take the bait, but it's worth analyzing Will's column and trying to expose the hidden assumptions underlying his attempt to create a no-win situation for Our Guy.

Jump with me now for the details.

Thank goodness there are still patriotic Americans brave enough to stand up to elitist hypocrites.  The good folks at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, with the support of Matt Drudge, have launched a Swift Boat style attack on Al Gore to coincide with the opening of Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

Oh, sure, Gore SAYS he's spreading the word on the dangers of CO2 emissions.  But did you know that the former Vice President has himself emitted CO2?  Yup.  He has.  Lots of it, too.

The scandal continues on the flip.

Many of you are, no doubt, familiar with the work of economist Dean Baker.  Baker is an innovative political thinker and has a gift for presenting economic issues in a clear, coherent way. He is particularly good at unmasking the hidden assumptions built into the political discourse about economic issues, and demonstrating how those assumptions, if unchallenged, will continue to put progressives on the defensive and, in the process, inflict economic damage on the country as a whole.

Baker has written a new book.  It's called The Conservative Nanny State:  How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer.  The book provides a handy guide to exposing conservative reliance on government intervention into the market economy.  It may well change the way you think about economics, markets and the like.  Jump with me for more.

Ya know, when "longtime political strategists" from the Democratic party start offering advice, my first instinct is to duck beneath the desk, stick my fingers in my ears and start singing loudly, "I can't hear you!!  Neener neener neener!"  Democrats seem to choose strategists like baseball teams choose managers:  Experience trumps all.  Never mind that the veteran's experience consists mainly of losing.  Once you're in the club, you can count on getting recycled ad nauseum, and I do mean nauseum.

So I was a bit surprised to find that this rather cogent '08 analysis, advancing a dream ticket of Al Gore and General Anthony Zinni, came from an apparently experienced Democrat strategist.  Extend for details.

Don't forget, folks, as you chomp down your Thanksgiving turkey, that the more historically accurate holiday, Suckers' Day, follows Thanksgiving as night follows day.

Suckers' Day honors the many times Europeans told Native Americans, "We come in peace," while thinking to themselves, "Suckers!!"

Fittingly, we celebrate Suckers' Day the day after Thanksgiving, in the traditional manner: by indulging in a consumer spending spree.  In this way, we symbolically assume the role of Native Americans  by willingly handing large sums of American money to merchants who assure us that they have our best interests in mind.

Chow down, folks!!

(From the diaries -- kos)

Reuters reports that, after a full meeting of the so-called Gang of 14, Senators Michael DeWine (R-Ohio) and Lindsay Graham (R-SC) backed off from earlier statements that the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court would not constitute "extraordinary circumstances" justifying the use of a filibuster:

There's more.

David Corn suggests that the White House staffers who leaked the account of President Bush's anger at Karl Rove to the New York Daily News believed they were helping the President by showing he was really, really angry about the leak(s) identifying Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA operative.  In fact, they have opened up new questions about the President's level of involvement in the matter.

Jump to read (or reread) Corn's comments and to see how juvenile delinquents may help us understand the psychology here.

I'm getting a bit tired of the hand-wringing and the debates over how to "frame" this administration's unforgivable incompetence.  Yes, we've all noticed that the media sheep bleat the Bush talking points on cue:  "Baaaah! Blame game.  Baaaaah!"  But what do we offer in response?  "Well, Don, the Bush administration is simply using these cutesy phrases as a way of avoiding accountability."  

Well, duh.

But accountability, in case no one's noticed, is, how to put this gently?  A fucking abstraction.  That's what.  A big motherfucking abstraction, lovely for policy wonks and lawyers.  But for actual communication with real people?  Not so good.

If you're still with me, hold your nose, close your eyes and
              J
                U
                  U
                    M
                      P
                        !!!

Unsurprisingly enough, the leadership of God's Own Party has been distancing themselves as fast as it can from poor ol' Pat Robertson.  As James Wolcott observes:

Follow me to the flip for more evidence of this unholy dis and a suggestion as to how we might stand up for Pat's honor.

My apologies if this has been posted already, but I couldn't find anything.

Murray Waas has added some to his report regarding the basis for early suspicion by investigators that Rove was less than entirely truthful about his role in leaking Valerie Plame's name to the press.

Today, in his blog whatever already, Waas writes:

(Jump with me now)

Many of us, myself included, believed early on that Karl Rove had acted inappropriately and had quite possibly committed a crime by revealing to his press contacts that Valerie Plame worked as a CIA operative.  

Now, however, we know the truth.  Although he acted for partisan political gain in an attempt to deceive voters into supporting a war that should have never been fought, and although he intended that his actions would cast doubt on someone he knew to have been telling the truth, and although in the process Rove damaged covert operations designed to stop nuclear proliferation, we now know that the patriotic Rove NEVER EVEN MENTIONED Valerie Plame's name, referring simply to "Joe Wilson's wife."

Accordingly, it is clear that to attempt to hold Rove responsible for his acts would constitute  moral relativism of the worst sort and will only result in more coddling of terrorists.  Mr. Rove, please accept my humble apologies.