I had to slow down posting for a few days since my nerve damage kicked up, but Dave and I will be over on Daily Kos at 4pm Pacific to do a live chat about our new book, OVER THE CLIFF with the great SusanG. She also interviewed us as part of the chat.

Sadly, No! documents how wingnut welfare queens like Mark Levin sell their books.

Disappearing from The Corner with the usual sound effect of Archie Bunker’s toilet flushing, and with the familiar lingering odor of Bay Rum and sock feet on the ottoman, it’s legal expert Mark Levin.

You know, we would LOVE for. . .oh, let’s say Dahlia Lithwick for instance, to question Mark Levin — the right-wing talk radio zealot and wingnut welfare author, the character who used the National Review to falsely claim that he had nominated Rush Limbaugh for a Nobel Peace Prize — about his knowledge of the Constitution, let alone Supreme Court decisions.

The Limbaugh Code: The New York Times best seller no one is talking about
By Dahlia Lithwick
Posted Friday, April 1, 2005, at 6:21 PM ET

[...]

I use the word “book” with some hesitation: Certainly it possesses chapters and words and other book-like accoutrements. But [Mark R. Levin's] Men in Black is 208 large-print pages of mostly block quotes (from court decisions or other legal thinkers) padded with a foreword by the eminent legal scholar Rush Limbaugh, and a blurry 10-page “Appendix” of internal memos to and from congressional Democrats—stolen during Memogate. The reason it may take you only slightly longer to read Men in Black than it took Levin to write it is that you’ll experience an overwhelming urge to shower between chapters.

It gets more scathing from there. Luckily, Mr. Levin is also a financial expert.

They make the case as do so many of us that conservative authors like Levin use the wingnut welfare system to finance their intellectually barren arguments and books. That's why it's important to support 'Liberal Authors' who don't use the Ctrl+C keyboard short cut as their primary research tool and if you can: Buy this book.

Clarence Thomas actually moved in court the other day, but would he then open up his mouth and ask a question about a case? Any case? The prospect of Thomas speaking caused quite a stir.

I almost start a mini press riot today at the Supreme Court, so certain am I that Justice Clarence Thomas is about to ask a question for the first time in nearly four years. In a case about indefinite detention for sex offenders, he summons someone to bring forth a law book; he puts on his glasses and reads carefully from the book, then leans forward toward the microphone. To his left, Justice Stephen Breyer looks at him expectantly. I nudge my colleagues on either side and hiss, "He's gonna do it, he's gonna do it." We all start craning and gaping. And then Thomas, who hasn't asked a question at oral argument since Feb. 22, 2006, takes off his glasses, tips his head back up against his headrest, and closes his eyes.

That will teach Dahlia Lithwick to never let Thomas fake her out again.

I would have loved a much broader scope that would have been applied to the Durham Probe on CIA interrogations, as many have already stated, but you know I see a sliver of hope buried in it. Jane Mayer said as much on Olbermann yesterday and I perked up a little when I heard her say it because I was thinking the same thing.

MAYER: Well, my guess is that if they actually open some kind of serious investigation, and Durham is said to be a very serious prosecutor, that even if they start at the very bottom, it's going to keep leading up and up through the chain of command. Because, if nothing else, if they actually bring charges against anybody at the CIA who was at the bottom of the food chain, the first thing that person's going to do is say "I was authorized, let me tell you what my orders were." So they've begun a process that could lead to the top.

Please hear me all Ye Whistleblowers. Cometh to DC and lay forth the truth unto thee! Speak thy words to Durham's ear and whisper the truth of unspeakable horrors. So dark and so horrible that thee will tremble from thy shame and call upon those who defiled us so.

If something breaks out during Durham's tepid investigation, who knows what it shall bring.

And read Dahlia Lithwick's excellent piece on this whole sordid affair.

Halfway There. Is half a torture investigation better than none at all?

Corrente: Progressive policies will always be vehemently opposed by the Conservative Movement and the winger billionaires because progressive policies are not in their economic interests.

The Agonist: It seems like the only way we can get people to fight alongside of us in this "War on Terror" is to pay them.

Dahlia Lithwick: The Bush administration's dumbest legal arguments of the year

apostropher: Hey assh*le, you're using my word!

Pam's House Blend: Is Bhutto's murder related to illegal immigration? Huck, thinks so...

OFF THE BEATEN PATH: Morning Martini, Akkam's Razor, Calculated Risk, black agenda report, Real Clear Politics

I was dropping off a DVD and turned on the radio to see who was on Conservative talk. Levin the "ultra conservative" (he's not happy with that label) was threatening to still watch football, but will change the channel when Olbermann comes on...Keith must be shaking in his boots and I'm sure it'll have a huge impact on their ratings...The guy sounds like he's got something stuck in his throat that compresses his voice which gives him a nasal quality to it. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's a weird quality to have as a talker....I remember when Alec Baldwin called him Hannity's cabin boy...If you missed it, I'll re-post the audio for fun...

Download | play

If you're not familiar with him, David Neiwart explains...And he did write a book that Dahlia Lithwick reviewed.

“I use the word “book” with some hesitation: Certainly it possesses chapters and words and other book-like accoutrements. But Men in Black is 208 large-print pages of mostly block quotes (from court decisions or other legal thinkers) padded with a foreword by the eminent legal scholar Rush Limbaugh, and a blurry 10-page “Appendix” of internal memos to and from congressional Democrats—stolen during Memogate. The reason it may take you only slightly longer to read Men in Black than it took Levin to write it is that you’ll experience an overwhelming urge to shower between chapters….read on

About a week ago, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick noted a tidbit that the rest of us missed: TV preacher Pat Robertson’s Regent University boasts that 150 of its graduates, including former top DoJ aide Monica Goodling, are serving in some capacity in the Bush administration. Lithwick noted that this is “a huge number for a 29-year-old school.” That’s certainly true; it’s also a huge number for a small right-wing college led by a radical televangelist who believes Americans brought 9/11 upon themselves.

Lithwick knew about the 150 Regent grads because, as she put it, the school’s website “proclaims [the number] proudly” on its About Us page. That is, until this past week.

Reader J.S. alerted me to an interesting observation: shortly after Lithwick’s piece was published and the 150 figure quickly drew national attention (and a Paul Krugman column), Regent edited its About Us page — and removed the reference to the 150 Bush-hired alumni.

According to Google cache, as recently as April 12, Regent’s “facts” page included seven bullets noting graduates in various political positions, with the seventh noting, in all bold letters, “150 graduates serving in the Bush Administration.” As of yesterday, the same page is identical, except the seventh bullet has been deleted. Regent stopped bragging about staffing the administration almost immediately after someone from the media noticed.

I’m open to suggestion, but it seems to me there are two possibilities: either Regent is suddenly embarrassed to be associated so closely with the Bush administration, or the administration is suddenly embarrassed to be associated so closely with Regent.

(A little late night fun at C&L)
Oh yea, it's us! He's not happy because Kate O'Berine's book tanked so quickly. The word I'm hearing is that many at the NRO aren't pleased either. Let's take a look at his book, " Men in Black," reviewed by Dahlia Lithwick so we can gauge his own incredible writing skills.
Slate:

"I use the word "book" with some hesitation: Certainly it possesses chapters and words and other book-like accoutrements. But Men in Black is 208 large-print pages of mostly block quotes (from court decisions or other legal thinkers) padded with a foreword by the eminent legal scholar Rush Limbaugh, and a blurry 10-page "Appendix" of internal memos to and from congressional Democrats—stolen during Memogate. The reason it may take you only slightly longer to read Men in Black than it took Levin to write it is that you'll experience an overwhelming urge to shower between chapters....read on"

It gets worse from there. Here's a very detailed Amazon review also. Nice job Mark, don't let honesty get in your way-although that seems to be a detail many conservative book writers share.

(Update) Yep, the Corner is unraveling as we speak.

via Kevin Drum

This is why I love Dahlia Lithwick. Here is her review of the latest in bird cage liner from Regnery Publishing, Mark Levin's Men in Black:

I use the word "book" with some hesitation: Certainly it possesses chapters and words and other book-like accoutrements. But Men in Black is 208 large-print pages of mostly block quotes (from court decisions or other legal thinkers) padded with a forward by the eminent legal scholar Rush Limbaugh, and a blurry 10-page "Appendix" of internal memos to and from congressional Democrats — stolen during Memogate. The reason it may take you only slightly longer to read Men in Black than it took Levin to write it is that you'll experience an overwhelming urge to shower between chapters.

What can you add to that?

The assault on judges continues

via War and Piece

Juan Cole dives into the debate on diversity in the blogosphere, rounding out his post with recommendations for some blogs that offer a diverse smattering of experience and expertise on the Middle East and other subjects. Jeanne D'Arc and Kevin Drum have more thoughts on women and blogging. Dahlia Lithwick too. Also Steve Gilliard