MICHAEL YON HAS A POST on the stolen photo issue:

I first became aware of the infringement when stunned and angry readers contacted me under the mistaken belief that I allowed SHOCK magazine to use it on their cover. I did not, and never would have agreed to their usage. I regularly turn down usage requests for this photo — uses that could earn money — because this photo is sacred to me and is representative of the U.S. soldiers I have come to know. It is also representative of the horrors of the enemy we all face.

My attorneys are in discussions with those at fault, and we have demanded that all copies of the magazine be removed from circulation and from the internet.

Stay tuned.

RAMESH PONNURU ASKS: “Is this really what the Republican Senate wants to take up in the aftermath of the immigration bill? A bill to pave the way for secessionism in Hawaii?”

REUTERS HAS SUSPENDED AN EMPLOYEE over threats aimed at Charles Johnson.

THE CARNIVAL OF CARS IS UP!

THE APPLE V. DOES DECISION is out, and Denise Howell is blogging it. It looks like a good result for the blogosphere.

UPDATE: Stanford’s Lauren Gelman calls it a “huge win” for Internet journalism.

THIS IS COOL: “Contests energize the battle against aging.”

THE LATEST BLOG WEEK IN REVIEW PODCAST is now up, with special guest Jeff Goldstein.

GOOD NEWS: “The International Ski Federation approved women’s ski jumping for the 2009 World Championships Friday, an important step before gaining Olympic approval.”

TIM LYNCH ON FANNIE MAE and trimming government for dummies.

JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH has been confirmed by the Senate.

A LETTER TO CINDY SHEEHAN from Cathy Seipp. It begins, “Dear Useful Idiot.”

FOR SOME REASON, I haven’t been getting email this morning. It seems to be some sort of gmail problem, and it’ll probably fix itself, but if you’ve emailed me through the site and I’ve missed it, I’m sorry.

IN THE MAIL: Nick Sagan’s novel, Everfree.

John Scalzi interviews Sagan here.

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: More on pork and corruption in the House:

Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona, another conservative stalwart, tried unsuccessfully to strip millions of dollars worth of farm subsidies out of the bill. “I offered eight amendments and every single one got voted down,” he says.

After the defeat, Flake told the New York Times, “”We have one of our former members in jail right now for basically selling earmarks”—referring to disgraced former member Randy “Duke” Cunningham. “He was able to get his earmarks through the legislative process without being challenged. Jack Abramoff reportedly referred to the Appropriations Committee as an ‘earmark favor factory.’”

In response to these comments, the earmarks’ defenders told the Times that Flake’s comments were out of line.

1994. Again. Right? I mean, these guys were never rocket scientists, but when I see this many people acting this stupidly — and in the face of lousy approval ratings that should be getting their attention — I have to wonder what I’m missing.

UPDATE: More here from Jacob Sullum:

Like most of their colleagues, Bonilla and Obey think buying votes with other people’s money is perfectly honorable—indeed, something (unlike respecting the Constitution) they are obligated to do as the people’s representatives. Hence it is light years away from the blatant corruption represented by such malefactors as Cunningham and Abramoff. Flake’s point, which Bonilla and Obey pretended to miss, was that the earmark system, by allowing legislators to quietly slip in funding for pet projects, invites such corruption.

But pork is also a form of corruption in itself, involving the use of taxpayer money not to perform the legitimate functions of the federal government but to serve the legislator’s own interest–in this case, staying in power, which brings with it all sorts of perks. Cunningham did pretty much the same thing, bringing federal money to his district at the behest of his constituents, except that he got some additional goodies in the process. If the actions are the same, does the antique armoire make all the difference?

To some people.

JOHN TABIN on the Jefferson search.

A BEGINNING FOR THE EUSTON MANIFESTO: Norm Geras has thoughts.

A FANNIE MAE SCANDAL TIMELINE: You’d think a scandal involving this much money and politics would get more attention. (Via Mickey Kaus).

HUH. JUST SAW THIS. Call it sincere flattery.

NANCY PELOSI speaks. But not clearly.

Some related thoughts over at GlennReynolds.com.

UPDATE: Reader Edward Tabakin writes:

I do believe we’ve just seen the Republicans make their own “Post Office.” Yep, 1994, all over again.

Why do you think the President caved so quickly? Did Hastert threaten to stop all legislation? Given the Senate’s Immigration Bill is headed for conference, that might be a good thing.

Indeed. I’m increasingly convinced that there’s something going on behind the scenes that we’re not hearing, but I’m not sure what it is.

DEATH THREATS from Reuters?

So does this mean that one man’s terrorist is another man’s . . . Reuters journalist?

A FRESH WARNING ABOUT REGULATING BLOGS: “Former Federal Election Commissioner Brad Smith said the threat of campaign regulations for blogs is still very much alive, despite the FEC largely exempting blogs earlier this year.”

Eternal vigilance, and all that. Plus, given the job that Congress is doing, it’s easy to see why there might be pressure to shut down criticism.

JIM GERAGHTY: “So, no sooner than I spend the better part of a week making the case as to why conservatives ought to not sit out the 2006, elections, Dennis Hastert and many senior Republicans behave in a manner that suggests they’re riding to the aid of Democratic Congressman William Jefferson and declaring that the FBI has no right to search a member’s office. . . . At this moment, I completely understand the anger of the Tapscottians, those who are content to see a GOP majority fall. Although honestly, at this moment, I don’t want to wait until November to see this kind of behavior punished.”

JOHN HINDERAKER: “The Bush administration and Republican Senators have badly misjudged both the attitudes of most Republicans (and, of course, most Americans) toward illegal immigration, and the intensity of those views.”

A NEW CONGRESSIONAL BUMPER STICKER: Heh.