The article, dated June 30th, ran yesterday. The problem is, it was actually dated January 16th 1964.

linky. Enjoy!

The inevitable has finally come to be, nearly eight months after the election.

- http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/court-rules-franken-has-won-senate-seat/?hp

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that an elected judge who received over three million dollars in campaign contributions from a contributor must recuse himself from cases involving that contributor.

Amazingly, four justices dissented. I fail to understand how they can look at a clear case of buying a judge and not take some action. Can somebody help me understand their reasoning?

A brief synopsis of the case (edited for brevity), full thing here:

The Salem News reports a recent Zogby Poll finds that 52% of Americans think we should legalize marajuana.

After decades of prohibition, has the country finally come to its senses? Discuss.

--

http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/election-08/october-surprise-alien-endorses-mccain/

Sara Palin on Hugh Hewett yesterday:

Call me elitist, but I've got a list of occupations where I'd be scared shipless if they were held by someone without the necessary qualifications and my posterior was on the line:

• Surgeon
• Bridge designer
• Lawyer
• Plumber
• vetranarian
• Investment advisor

It's been a week since she showed up on the national scene, riding in on a rocketship, upstaging Obama's nomination acceptance speech, and dominating the news cycle. After seven days, everyone is still trying to figure out who she is, where she came from, what makes her tick, and what she might do if she actually takes power on the national level. (and the McCain campaign itself is still among those wondering along with the rest of us.)

Here's a data point (or several, actually):

Anne Kilkenny, small-town mom and housewife, resident of Wasilla who's known Palin for 18 years weighs in.

While there's a lot of talk about who won which state, and how many delegates come with each victory, there's a tale to tell about the underlying numbers: How many actual votes did each candidate get?

For instance, here's the results from Georgia:

Obama    699,908	
Clinton	 327,902	
Huckabee 325,642
McCain	 302,989	
Romney	 289,157	
Paul	  27,896	
Edwards	  17,956	
Biden	   2,529	

In one of the reddest states in the country, the leading GOP candidate finishes third and doesn't even get half as many votes as Obama.

The Michigan Presidential primaries are next week, and for those not up to speed, the short version is that it's a mess. When the date got moved up both parties stripped (or threatened to strip) Michigan of its delegates. The Republican candidates promised not to campaign, and most of the Democrats pulled their names off the ballot. As a Democrat I'm looking at a ballot that consists of only Hillary for delegates that won't count. What's the point?

So I'm voting in the GOP primary. At least all the major candidates are on the ballot, so my vote might just affect something. But that prompts the question: for whom? And that's why I'm soliciting your help: who and why.

That's a direct quote from a NRO article by Deroy Murdock with the title "Waterboarding Has Its Benefits"

I submit that this is the moment when the pro-torture movement has officially jumped the shark. I had to doublecheck that I wasn't actually reading The Onion. I couldn't make stuff up like this if I tried:

"In short, there is nothing “repugnant” about waterboarding."