Pathetic

Here's what you need to remember about the most important race in this very important election: Something or nothing. That's the choice we have this month. We can do something, or we can continue to go along with nothing.

This is what you need to remember about Question 3. The Education Initiative (TEI) gives us the opportunity to finally do what our elected "leaders" have failed to do in Carson City for far too long. But if voters say no to Question 3/TEI this fall, there's no guarantee we'll see any of the changes TEI's opponents are now promising.

This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun wants us to believe LVGEA's horrifically pathetic Whitney Houston lip sync is somehow indicative of them "trying to craft a plan that will grow our public school system into what we need to be a 21st-century competitor". Huh? So now, we're supposed to believe the same people who've opposed every attempt at progressive tax reform and strengthening public education are now "finding common ground" with the very people they've been fighting tooth and nail all this time? While we're all for legal marijuana, perhaps Mr. Greenspun needs to put down the "magic brownies" before taking calls from anyone at Wizard of Oz Global HQ LVGEA.

This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, the local "newspaper" (of ill repute) decided to do an in-house ad against TEI. No really, the "newspaper" went there... Again! Now, we're just wondering when the "newspaper" will start slut shaming TEI proponents and publishing teachers' home addresses.

It's a shame we have to rely on "news media" like these newspapers. One publishes the classic "bid'ness establishment" fantasy, while the other is so desperate to fill ad space that it has to publish its own ads. While both still employ numerous great reporters, the leadership of both continue to value access over enlightenment.

Today is one of those days when we wish CityLife was still around to read both of the newspapers to high filth. But since that paragon of true journalistic virtue is no longer with us, it's now up to us to state the obvious. And what's obvious to all thinking Nevadans today is that both Southern Nevada newspapers looked like pathetic imitations of their former selves with their craptastic editorials.

The only thing more pathetic than these newspaper editorials of questionable value is No on 3's campaign of half-@$$ed fearmongering and laughable distortions. In fact, this may ultimately prove to be valuable... To the Yes on 3 campaign. If this is truly all No on 3 has, this says everything about why TEI landed on our ballots in the first place.

The Real Issue

It was supposed to be the ultimate battle royale. It was supposed to be a war between Nevada royal families. It was supposed to be one of the "hot ticket races" of the 2014 election cycle.

Early this year, G-O-TEA operatives were salivating over the opportunity to knock out Ross Miller (D). The outgoing Secretary of State has built up quite the list of accomplishments during his tenure there. And even though he's running for Attorney General this fall, media pundits can't help but speculate about his political future. Obviously, Republican campaign consultants were shaking in their boots.

Then came Adam Laxalt (R). He seemed to be the answer to G-O-TEA prayers. He has a pretty face, a famous last name, and a seemingly impeccable resume. What more could Nevada Republicans ask for?

But when Adam Laxalt began revealing his "most flawed" "political issues", we could sense something was off. How could a well trained lawyer not understand the basics of Constitutional law? We understand he has his "political issues", but those should not become "legal issues" as well.

And speaking of "legal issues", Adam Laxalt has plenty. When his law firm did a performance review, Laxalt's self-assessment strayed quite far from the assessment of his seniors and peers. And now that this performance review is becoming public knowledge, his campaign has been in complete "damage control" mode.

Ever since Jon Ralston revealed the skeletons in Adam Laxalt's closet, his campaign has tried just about everything to change the subject. They've tried blaming whoever leaked the documents. They've tried questioning the authenticity of the documents. They've tried leaking some of Laxalt's military documents. And of course, they will probably try reviving "Gift-gate" yet again... Even as Laxalt jumps to accept all sorts of gifts from one Sheldon Adelson.

Herein lies the crux of Adam Laxalt's real issue. Forget the bombast over the "gifts". Forget the howls of protest over the "document leaks". And forget the whining over "political hits".

Here's the real issue: Adam Laxalt has yet to prove his qualifications to serve as Nevada's Attorney General. He and his biggest Republican boosters can throw temper tantrums on as many "newspaper" pages as they want, but this won't change the issue of Laxalt struggling to make his own case. They can cry as much as they want about Ross Miller being on top of his game, but it's not his fault that Nevada Republicans have so many issues with their handpicked opponent for him.

New Low

Just over 2 months ago, we noticed this. While their "Range War" was still in high gear, members of Cliven Bundy's armed militia gang made violent threats against US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D). This wasn't the first time Senator Reid faced violent threats, but it also wasn't the first time we noticed the violently dangerous side of #BundyRanch.

Last month, Las Vegas Metro Police received a horrific wake-up call to the severity of this situation when Officers Alyn Beck & Igor Soldo, along with civilian Joseph Robert Wilcox, we're shot to death by 2 extremely zealous #BundyRanch fans. Suddenly, Senator Reid looked to be awfully prescient for warning everyone about the "Patriot Movement"/sovereign citizen presence in Bunkerville & Mesquite.

But now, Senator Reid and his family face new threats. And why's that? Oh, we can thank everyone's favorite reckless "newspaper" for this doozy.

Believe it or not, the "newspaper" decided to print the streets where 2 of Senator Reid's sons live. The "newspaper" also noted that these streets happen to be in the same Henderson community where Harry & Landra Reid are moving to. Keep it klassy, "newspaper"!

Just last week, the FBI confirmed it's investigating an Indiana network with ties to the late Jerad & Amanda Miller after a member of this group threatened to kill police officers and judges who were involved with his 2011 arrest on drug charges. And last month, fellow "sovereign citizen" Brent Douglas Cole opened fire on law enforcement agents in the Lake Tahoe area. We've already seen violence emerge after Cliven Bundy and his "TEA" flavored friends decided to start their "Range War".

So why on earth did the "newspaper" publish the street addresses of Senator Reid's sons? The head honchos at Bonanza headquarters know these fringe characters are out there. Why give them such a road map to bloody tragedy?

Amazingly, the "newspaper" has found a new low to fall into. Just as as we're seeing a rise in extreme right domestic terrorism, the "newspaper" decides now is the perfect time to give aspiring "revolutionaries" the residence of Senator Reid & several of his family members. Words fail to describe the new EPIC FAIL the local "newspaper" has just committed.

If It's Dirty, Why Not Clean It?

How many times have we confronted this? We've examined the shells. We've smelled the stinky juice. We've felt the shadows. We've even raced to catch up with the Speedway.

Yet through it all, we've become quite dizzy from all the rides on Nevada's notorious "Merry-go-round of Corruption". Sadly, we need to step back on that merry-go-round this morning to examine an aspect of Nevada politics that is often overlooked: our local judiciary.

We must give credit where it's due. "Newspaper" columnist Jane Ann Morrison (one of the few other reasons to even bother reading it) recently exposed the kind of bare knuckle political maneuvering that we typically don't expect on the judicial bench. There are now even accusations of what authorities in other states call bribery... But what we in Nevada just refer to as "politics as usual".

To be fair, there are a number of shady characters in this story. At this point, it's hard to figure out who's telling the complete truth (if anyone). However, what can't be denied at this point is that a number of judicial candidates are dependent upon well heeled contributors who also happen to visit the courtrooms they aspire to preside over. And that in and of itself is a problem.

One of the foundations of our judiciary is the guarantee of equal protection under the law. How are we supposed to expect that if we sense that those who can afford to "pay to play" happen to receive "more equal protection" than the rest of us? How are we supposed to trust our courts' ability to fairly interpret the law when they're under the influence of a few powerful & moneyed interests who expect a certain interpretation that happens to favor them?

We've said this many times before, but we must say it again today: If we want to end this dizzying feeling we sense when viewing the dirty reality of Nevada politics, we must stop the merry-go-round of corruption. And the only way to truly stop it is to end the seemingly endless flow of dirty money into all aspects of our political system... Even our judiciary.

We're again hearing debate over whether we should continue direct election of judges, or just allow the state to appoint them. And while fair arguments can be made for either side, we sense both sides are missing the point. After all, can we fully trust the Governor and legislators when they are also under the influence of numerous campaign donors?

For us, there's one clear solution to this problem: clean money. Why not simply level the playing field so we can all participate?

It's already working in other parts of the nation. Why not bring it here to Nevada? (And for that matter, why can't the entire nation have it?) Lordy knows we need a whole lot of disinfectant to clean up our system. So why not start cleaning it up already?

RIP, CityLife??!!

When we started the conversation on this little blog of ours nearly five years ago, we did occasionally wonder whether this site was actually necessary. After all, this damned thing is on Blogger! And it's a site slapped together by someone who came here because he didn't always like writing by certain other people's rules.

Oops, did I really just air some of my (quite old) dirty laundry?

Enough of that. Today, we have more important things to talk about. Believe it or not, another one is close to biting the dust. And what might that "another one" be?

Here's a hint: Go back to September and remember what we said about a little law suit involving the viability of the Las Vegas Sun?

[... W]ith the rise of TV newsrooms and online news sites, there are at least theoretically alternatives to the one "newspaper" left standing...

Except that's in theory. What about reality? Just how invested are the local TV stations in supporting real journalism? And can a few scrappy web sites truly make up for losing what was once a great paper?

For now, Southern Nevada still has two newspapers in circulation. We just don't know how much longer this will last. In so many ways, the slow and ugly decline of The Sun reflects the brutal reality of print journalism's dilemma in The Digital Age. And both the recent tabloid-ization of The Sun & the decimated reputation of the other "newspaper" remind us of what happens when corporate profit seeking gets in the way of reporting the news. We may be nearing the end of an era for Southern Nevada, but this is only the continuation of a disturbing trend in journalism.

Last fall, we received a rude awakening. The Sun was already becoming a shell of its former self, but it still had value as a newspaper reporting on real news. What would happen if it were to fully decease?

Even before it started becoming obvious that The Sun's days are numbered, we were concerned about the lack of independent voices in our local media. All too often, both major papers seemed to advocate a certain point of view that looked to be all too convenient for the powers-that-be in this state. Where could we find the news and views that the powers-that-be try to prevent us from seeing?

This is typically where Las Vegas CityLife steps in. For over two decades, CityLife has been more than willing to go places the "traditional media" in this town have refused to go. And even though CityLife has shared the same owner as the "newspaper" for some time, it's somehow avoided to catch the same disease the "newspaper" has refused to cure itself of.

But very soon, this will be no more. Why? Stephens Media recently decided to discontinue its publishing of Las Vegas CityLife. Next week's issue is supposed to be the last.

And this brings us back to where we started this discussion. I honestly never thought I'd be placed in such an awkward position. I've been accustomed to being a tiny electronic cog in much bigger alternative media machine. I never imagined the day when I'd be among the few alternative, independent voices left.

As we've mentioned before, this scrappy little site that was slapped together by some punky little online rabble-rouser just can't replace an entire newspaper. And I know we're not the only ones who realize this. As we speak, a MoveOn petition (calling for Stephens Media to let CityLife live on) is collecting signatures. Who knows, maybe Stephens corporate bosses aren't fully immune from public outrage?

But if that isn't the case, someone will need to fill the void left by a dead CityLife. Paging Vegas Seven?

In the mean time, we'll still be here. We just didn't want to become necessary this way. And we just don't have an entire office to publish an entire newspaper. That's supposed to be where actual newspapers step in. When did it become acceptable for shortsighted corporate greed to kill all this journalism?

End of an Era?

Moments ago, a local judge denied a preliminary injunction to a very possible deal (between Stephens Media and some Greenspun family members) to end the joint operating agreement (JOA) that officially allows for the printing and physical distribution of two newspapers in Southern Nevada. This may not seem like a big deal at first glance, but take a closer look. There's more to this.

Sure, overall newspaper circulation has been in decline for years. And specifically here, the Las Vegas Sun has struggled to stay in business for nearly a decade. The JOA is likely the only reason why there's any Sun print edition at all. Most folks (moiself included) now get their news by other means, such as the great wide world of the internet. (Hey, that's what's allowed me to report, comment, on bloviate on the news here!)

Speaking as an internet person myself, the rise of blogs, online news clearinghouse sites, web-izines, and other news sites has very much changed the way we see news. A century ago, we had to wait until the newspaper was delivered to see the headlines. But now, one can click on a variety of sites from a variety of internet enabled devices to see what's happening in the world.

But you know what? Even though I'm very much an internet person, I still appreciate newspapers. They invest in newsrooms, dedicated reporters, and respected space for the community to discuss the important issues of the day. Hell, newspapers often help me and other bloggers catch onto stories we might otherwise miss!

This is why the possible death of the Las Vegas Sun concerns me. I know there are folks at that paper who still want to deliver quality content. While recent cost-cutting moves have resulted in more "fluff", there are still reporters there hunting for the truth. And while the editorial pages often seem to reflect the views of certain "friends in high places", they at least offer different points of view that one can't always find in the other "newspaper" in this town.

And that's what makes today's news at least somewhat alarming. The "newspaper's" management long ago quit caring about their reputation and allowed the state’s largest paper to become the state's largest laughingstock. Can we afford to allow the "newspaper" to become the only paper in the state’s most populous county?

Or does it even matter any more? As I alluded to above, recent budget cuts and "editorial makeovers" at The Sun have resulted in that paper losing a whole lot of serious journalistic talent as it's become more focused on repeating celebrity gossip than highlighting the real reporting from the journalists who are still there. And with the rise of TV newsrooms and online news sites, there are at least theoretically alternatives to the one "newspaper" left standing...

Except that's in theory. What about reality? Just how invested are the local TV stations in supporting real journalism? And can a few scrappy web sites truly make up for losing what was once a great paper?

For now, Southern Nevada still has two newspapers in circulation. We just don't know how much longer this will last. In so many ways, the slow and ugly decline of The Sun reflects the brutal reality of print journalism's dilemma in The Digital Age. And both the recent tabloid-ization of The Sun & the decimated reputation of the other "newspaper" remind us of what happens when corporate profit seeking gets in the way of reporting the news. We may be nearing the end of an era for Southern Nevada, but this is only the continuation of a disturbing trend in journalism.

Shame

Back in January, we decided to stop providing the local Southern Nevada "newspaper" the attention it clearly does not deserve. When was the last time the "newspaper" had a good reputation for actually reporting the news? So why treat it as such?

We've been doing our part here to actually pay attention to the real news. Yet yesterday, the "newspaper" published an editorial so heinous and disgusting that we can't let it get away with this. And fortunately for us, Sin City Siren managed to catch the racism and sexism on display yesterday.

I’m also irritated that in both of these op-eds, Sherm gives what he thinks is a clever indictment on Assemblywoman Lucy Flores’ testimony about having an abortion. He wonders allowed at whether or not Sen. Ruben Kihuen’s characterization of Flores’ testimony as courageous is actually courageous. You know why Lucy is courageous? She didn’t retract the truth about her life after she faced threats of violence just for sharing it. That is the culture we live in. You don’t like abortion —then you can just threaten and bully a person into silence. But I guess you wouldn’t know anything about that, would you Sherm?

And, Sherm, for all your back-handed compliments to teen moms, do you support any programs or services that actually help teen mothers, who face a higher rate of poverty and less opportunities in the work force due to a higher rate of dropping out of school? (Only about 50 percent of teen mothers graduate from high, according to the CDC.) Where is your support for those brave teen moms, Sherm? Where’s your op-ed extolling their courageous decision to have their babies? And furthermore, where’s your reality check that growing up the child of teen mom isn’t all its cracked up to be? I should know. But I guess there’s no room in your world-view for the reality that, yes, white teens have babies, too. [...]

And by the way, comprehensive sex education has been proven more effective than abstinence-only programs and is endorsed by a large number of agencies that work to better the lives of children including the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the Society for Adolescent Medicine and the American College Health Association.

So the "newspaper" struck (out) yet again. Is anyone truly surprised? Here's the short response to this latest "newspaper" turdblossom.



And here's the longer answer: Clearly, the "newspaper" publisher/former editor doesn't know what's in AB 230, why comprehensive sex education matters, and who's ultimately hurt by the status quo (hint: everyone). And on top of that, he decided to engage in the time (dis)honored tradition of "slut-shaming". He must have learned nothing from Rush Limbaugh's EPIC FAIL in this department.



It's a shame that we've become accustomed to seeing this kind of garbage in the state's largest "newspaper". It's a shame that Nevada women continue to suffer this kind of degradation. And it's truly a shame that many in the media implicitly and/or explicitly condone what should be shameful behavior.

Oh, and it's not as if "slut-shaming" works in reducing teen pregancies and/or preventing the spread of sexually transmitted infections. If anything, the opposite may actually be true. Threatening young women won't stop the above from happening. Knowledge, on the other hand, will. After all, knowledge is power.

So we should know better. And the powers that be at the "newspaper" should have known better. What a shame.

Wherein "Newspaper" Officially Jumps Shark

How many times before have we had to point out the lousy excuse for "journalism" that constantly fills the pages of Nevada's largest "newspaper"? There was its insane campaign against Harry Reid in 2010. There was its disgusting campaign against Steven Horsford in 2012. And there have been so many other FAIL-o-rific moments that we lost count 3 years ago.

But now, this "newspaper" has finally achieved its crown jewel of EPIC FAIL! No really, this shit is way too crazy for anyone to make up.

Indeed, The Las Vegas Review-Journal, which almost never credits other journalists for breaking stories and regularly takes content from other organizations, has had the Associated Press send a letter to broadcast outlets invoking a contract privilege to block them from using RJ content found on the wires as of Jan. 24. These are the same folks who, under the "leadership" of then-Publisher Sherman Frederick, hired a company to protect its content, an effort that quickly became a national embarrassment.

I feel badly for business reporter Jennifer Robison, who had to write a story last week about this latest RJ initiative long after it had been broken by other news organizations. Check out that irony, folks!

The letter [...] indicates that the AP, and rightly so, thinks its service is a way to share content, not block it: "Generally we encourage sharing among members and give credit to exclusive news within the story so significant stories can be published broadly as a service to the public and a way to build the member's brand," wrote Anthony Marquez, the AP regional chief based in LA. (By the way, I called the AP last week for comment and....got no return call.)

Now, I acknowledge that the RJ's brand is so damaged after the 2010 Kill Reid debacle that maybe it does not want to build it, and it long ago gave up on being a service to the public. But even for the "newspaper," this is an abomination.

Now you know what's coming next. Yes, we must do it now!



Congratulations, "Newspaper"! You can now ride that "FAIL WHALE" all the way to the sunset. After all, whatever was left of your credibility truly is gone at this point.

Still, I can't laugh about this entirely. After all, this is supposed to be the largest "newspaper" in the state. And there are still some good reporters there who try to deliver solid, good news. It's just pathetic that the parent company has allowed this "newspaper" to devolve into such a nasty, worthless rag by failing to invest in more original reporting, allowing way too much radical right opinion to permeate the news pages, and by waging this completely absurd war against legitimate content sharing.

So until this problem is fixed, you will no longer see any links to the "newspaper" here. And other than perhaps the occasional mocking and/or fact checking, you probably won't even hear about it any more here. Hey, what's fair is fair. And we can no longer take any shark jumping from this FAIL WHALE.

NV-Sen: Maybe "Newspaper" Can't Save Heller?

Another day, another crazy "newspaper poll". Today, the "newspaper" is claiming Dean Heller has taken a 6% lead overall in the Senate race... And that he's doing so because he's supposedly leading (??!!) among Latino voters and is running close in Clark County. Come on, now. You know what's coming next.



Here's what Ralston says.

"Newspaper" shows Heller up 6. Also: He's winning Latinos by 8, indies by 25 and close in Clark. Welcome 2 fantasyland: http://t.co/V5ZEL0KC

And here's what I say. Again, most public pollsters have a bad habit of undersampling likely Democratic voters. And in particular, Survey USA (the company the "newspaper" now uses for polling) is notorious for paying no interest whatsoever in ensuring it has the proper demographics. There's really no reason to whip into a fury over lousy polls.

It seems like Shelley Berkley herself is not. Instead, yesterday she met with The Las Vegas Sun editorial board to discuss why she believes she has what it takes to serve as one of Nevada's US Senators.

Berkley also took Heller to task for supporting a Republican-backed budget that would reconfigure Medicare, turning the program into a subsidy that Democrats have charged is a voucher program for anyone under age 55.

“That’s not Medicare,” Berkley said. “It’s some version of health care for older Americans, but it’s not Medicare.”

Heller, who has not responded to invitations to address the Sun’s editorial board, has said he was proud of his two votes for the budget in question, commonly referred to as the “Ryan budget” after the congressman and now-vice presidential candidate who wrote it. He has also argued that the changes to Medicare within it are necessary to the long-term sustainability of the program, and do not upset the fundamental object and purpose of the Medicare program.

Berkley listed her positions on energy development (she’s in favor of investing in renewables), small business (she wants to keep their taxes low) and tourism promotion (she wants more visa waivers and travel tax credits) as her biggest selling points for improving the economy in Nevada. [...]

On immigration, Berkley repeated that she would not vote in favor of a compromise bill that did not include a pathway to citizenship for certain undocumented immigrants.

There you have it. This is honestly another big reason why I doubt Heller is doing all that well here in Southern Nevada. He doesn't even want to meet with the editoral board of the one legitimate newspaper in this town! In addition, he's been skipping candidate forums and other opportunities for Clark County voters to meet him. And, of course, he's been struggling as of late to hide his "tea party" sympathies from voters.



Remember this. It's far more insightful than what we're seeing in that other "newspaper" today.

11:00 AM UPDATE:

Here's what Ralston just caught.

I'm not surprised the Shelley Berkley campaign folks decided to release their internals with the "newspaper" (Sen. Dean Heller plus 6) and Rasmussen Reports (Heller plus 7) polls released today.

Neither of those surveys has been close to accurate in Nevada -- although perhaps 2012 will be the exception -- and Mellman nailed the 2010 race. He has Berkley, for whom he is working, up 3. [...]

All about turnout now and Mellman's models are as good as they get in Nevada.

Yep, yep, yep. The top lines are 41% Berkley (D) & 38% Heller (R) with 5% for the IAP candidate and 11% undecided. While I suspect the IAP candidate may not actually get that high of a vote count come November 6, on the other hand we're talking about a Mark Mellman poll here. He nailed the NV-Sen 2010 results when almost every other pollster choked. This shouldn't be taken lightly.

NV-01: Yes, Chris Edwards Deserves a Debate... With Himself.

Ah, so Chris Edwards is back. It seems whenever we're in the midst of important developments in the hot races that people are actually paying attention to, Chris Edwards jumps out in a desperate move to grab attention. This is exactly what he's doing today... With help from our (never to be) "trusted" local "newspaper".

Oh, yes. They went there. Again!

While I certainly appreciate the value of debates in informing voters, Chris Edwards should think twice before cheering on his favorite "newspaper" and demanding more debates. Oh, and he should actually decide what he stands for!

He keeps claiming that somehow "Dina Titus hates Hispanics!" Yet so far, he has no proof of that. And whenever asked about his own ideas for Latin@ community empowerment, he is never able to separate himself from his own party's nonstop insults directed at Latin@ voters. Perhaps this is because Chris Edwards really does agree with his own G-O-TEA base on this?

And really, what else can Chris Edwards talk about? He contradicts himself on the Recovery Act. He can't say anything on health care. He can't completely decide how he wants to balance the federal budget. And again, he has no real substance when it comes to Latin@ outreach. So really, who is this dude and why is he running?

Before Chris Edwards demands more debates with Dina Titus, he needs to finish the debate he continues to have with himself.

What They Really Mean When Crying "Integrity"

Today, the local "newspaper" posted an editorial on the importance of voter suppression "election integrity". They actually claimed that because some non-citizen accidentally got a postcard encouraging online voter registration, somehow Ross Miller is trying to steal the election for Obama... And use this to further his own career! In case you just can't read the entire piece, here's a quick summary.



No really, they might as well have let her write it. Even Jon Ralston tweeted that earlier. And it's crystal clear as to what they really want when they cry about "integrity".

Yet again, the G-O-TEA is demanding voter suppression because that's the only way it can win. As we've discussed before, the kind of "voter fraud" that Sharron Angle and The R-J Editorial Board claim to worry about so much is so rare that it's virtually nonexistent. If anything, they should be worried about the denial of voter registration to the state's poor, as well as the continuing voter registration fraud scandal started by operatives in their own party.

But they're not. Instead, they keep pursuing "integrity" via voter suppression. It pretty much reveals where the G-O-TEA's true priorities lie.

NV-04: "Newspaper" Strikes Yet Again!

Last Friday, Las Vegas' local "newspaper" embarrassed itself again with a horribly flawed "poll" showing an implausible "victory" scenario for Joe Heck. Today, the "newspaper" has a new NV-04 "poll" showing Danny Tarkanian leading Steven Horsford 45-42.

Here's why the "newspaper" is wrong (yet again!). Just like last week's results, Survey USA's internals make absolutely no sense. Believe it or not, this "poll" claims Baby Tark is winning Latino voters by 8! Shockingly, it also claims Baby Tark is winning with young voters and urban voters, and that he's winning 13% of African-American voters. Sorry, but this is simply not happening.

The sample also skews older and more male than the final electorate will probably be, especially since this is also a Presidential Election. All in all, this just looks incredibly sloppy and totally unbelievable. And what I said last week still stands today.

So why did this happen? Well, when a "newspaper" becomes accustomed to accepting sloppy "reporting", this is the result. Believe it or not, its polls were actually starting to make sense when it teamed up with UNLV's polling institute. It's a shame that the "newspaper" actually dumped a solid local outfit for this garbage.

It's one thing for the "newspaper" to continually attack Steven Horsford in its editorial page. But when it breathlessly copies from Republican press releases and put those smears in the news section, that's simply not journalism. And when that same "newspaper" publishes incredibly flawed "polls" with horridly bad samples, that's just a bad joke.

NV-03: "Newspaper" Strikes Again!

Early this week, a local Southern Nevada "newspaper" embarrassed itself (again) with poorly reasoned endorsements. Today, the "newspaper" is out to embarrass itself some more. Oh yes, that's right. It's time for a new round of "polls" that make absolutely no sense!

In today's edition, the "newspaper" teamed up with the incredibly shoddy Survey USA to release this new "poll" showing Joe Heck leading by 13%. So why shouldn't we just take them at their word? Here's what Ralston tweeted.

"Newspaper" poll has @RepJoeHeck up by 13 over @JohnOceguera. Wow! Also wow: Dems have slight reg edge in #nv03; poll breakdown: 37-32, R.

And there's this.

Link to "newspaper" poll in #nv03 -- http://t.co/K86u6WHy. But look at goofy demographics here: http://t.co/OymyxoCW #2010redux #surveyUSA

Indeed, Survey USA's internals make absolutely no sense. The sample skews much older than the likely electorate we'll see this fall, and Joe Heck probably isn't winning that many minority voters. No really, they know what's going on. Oh, and since Democrats recently took the lead in voter registration in NV-03, it makes no sense to show 5% more Republicans in the sample.

So why did this happen? Well, when a "newspaper" becomes accustomed to accepting sloppy "reporting", this is the result. Believe it or not, its polls were actually starting to make sense when it teamed up with UNLV's polling institute. It's a shame that the "newspaper" actually dumped a solid local outfit for this garbage.

NV-01/NV-03: A Word on R-J Endorsements

Next time someone tells you how important an endorsement from a certain "newspaper" is, remind that one to read this editorial from October 3, 2010. Two years ago, Nevada was facing a clear choice in our US Senate election. And so much was at stake for our state. Even REPUBLICANS like Dema Guinn and the late Bill Raggio endorsed Harry Reid because of what he's done for Nevada. In addition, the traditionally center-right Reno Gazette Journal endorsed Reid because his Northern Nevada (!!!) based opponent was just too unqualified and extreme. Yet despite all that, this certain Las Vegas "newspaper" went all in for Sharron Angle!

Since this "newspaper" actually endorsed such an extreme and unqualified candidate for US Senate just two years ago, why are we supposed to take its endorsements seriously now? If Nevada's supposed "leading newspaper" could actually endorse a candidate who actually wanted to take a wrecking ball and slam it right into Nevada's economy, why are we supposed to lend this "newspaper" any gravitas with its current slate of endorsements?

I ask because teabaggers are already buzzing over this "newspaper" endorsing Joe Heck for reelection to Congress in NV-03 and Chris Edwards for Congress in the now open NV-01 seat. Frankly, I'm not surprised this happened. In fact, this is just standard operating procedure for this "newspaper".

After all, it already endorsed the Angle-Heck "tea party" agenda in 2010. It's just doubling down on the crazy in 2012, so it has to double down on Joe Heck and his ideological objections to saving the middle class foundation of our economy. I guess the "newspaper" buys Joe Heck's argument that attacking women's health care is a far better use of a Congressman's time than cooperating with The President and other Members of Congress to actually put more Americans back to work.

And then, there's Chris Edwards. Like a certain "Sharrontology Obtuse Angle", he has a penchant for talking out of both sides of his mouth and shoddily hiding his allegiance to "tea party" extremism. Oh, and he's already doing a great job following Angle's lead on "Latino community outreach". Wow. Just wow.

Honestly, it's irritating to even have to discuss this Las Vegas "newspaper" and its silly endorsements now. But apparently since some in the media still want to pretend that there's anything rational and/or significant about these endorsements, we must remember how and why this "newspaper" totally discredited itself in the first place. When even the widow of a REPUBLICAN Governor and the REPUBLICAN State Senate leader acknowledge that their own party screwed up in choosing its US Senate nominee, a "newspaper" shouldn't be rushing to endorse pure batshit crazy.

And we shouldn't be subjected to this "newspaper" and its silly season of pointless endorsements now.

NV-03: In Attacking Oceguera, "Newspaper" Ignores Heck's Checks

Yesterday, a certain "newspaper" continued its activity of breathlessly copying from Republican Party press releases by rehashing a familiar attack against John Oceguera, who's now running against Joe Heck in NV-03. "Oooh, that big, bad GUV'MINT worker! Johnny O was a firefighter! Johnny O was a big, bad GUV'MINT worker & retired at 43!!!"

They make it sound like Oceguera is somehow "cheated the system", but here's what they won't say. They won't mention the insane work schedules that firefighters have to endure, work schedules that most often include 24 hour work days and so much more.

In most urban departments, firefighters work 24-hour shifts. The schedule involves a rotation of three shifts, so that two of every three days are free. Since firefighters literally live together for 24 hours, the firehouse becomes a combination of work and home, and coworkers constitute a sort of second family. Firefighters often spend more time with crew members than with their own families. [...]

Although the life of a firefighter may seem exciting and glamorous, it has many challenges. Camaraderie and strong bonds between coworkers, along with respect from grateful members of the community is extremely rewarding. However, firefighting is a physically demanding and dangerous occupation.

Chetkovich observes, "Meeting such hazards requires certain kinds of personal and social qualities, the physical capacity to do the work, the stamina to continue strenuous activity for hours with little rest. But the work requires firefighters to 'think on their feet,' rapidly assess the problem at hand, plan a course of action and then quickly react when conditions change. Throughout an emergency, a firefighter must maintain a constant and heightened awareness, never losing sight of the broader picture while attending to a specific task."

Other challenges include a work schedule that requires nights and weekends away from home, sleep deprivation due to work schedule and anxiety and a high level of stress due to exposure to trauma and tragedy.

Considering all of this, it's actually quite typical for firefighters to retire in their 40s, as John Oceguera did. And considering firefighters' line of work, their benefits really aren't as "astronomical" as a certain "newspaper" wants you to believe.

Now compare and contrast the supposed "crimes" that the supposedly "libertarian" "newspaper" want to lay on John Oceguera's feet with the kind of work that "tea party" darling Joe Heck has done. For all the "newspaper's" complaints about "BIG GUV'MINT!!!", where are the complaints on this?

Here are the facts-

Triple-dipping Instance 1:
Senator Joe Heck collected all the following checks simultaneously

Government Paycheck #1: Since 1993, Senator Joe Heck has had various contracts with the Southern Nevada Health District.

Government Paycheck #2: From 1998 to 2003, Senator Heck worked as a medical director at a federally supported facility... in Maryland.

Government Paycheck #3: Since 2002, Senator Heck has been paid as a consultant by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.

Triple-dipping Instance 2:
Senator Joe Heck collected all the following checks simultaneously

Government Paycheck #1: Senator Heck served in the Nevada Legislature in the 2005 and 2007 legislative sessions.

Government Paycheck #2: Senator Heck received a $5,000 monthly retainer from the Southern Nevada Health District during the 2007 legislative session.

Government Paycheck #3: Senator Heck was under contract to receive compensation from Metro during April, May and June 2007, while the Legislature was in session.

All in all, Joe Heck has probably benefitted from over $1,000,000 in government contracts. In 2009, he signed a contract with Southern Nevada Health District to provide at least 35 hours per month of "consulting services" for $100 per hour (and rising to $125 per hour for "overtime"). So why wasn't the "newspaper" ever outraged by this kind of "government waste"? So compensating firefighters for dangerous work is "wasteful", yet pricey consultant contracts are not?

Wait, I thought the "tea party" was all about ridding the government of "wasteful spending" and "corruption". Joe Heck triple dipped with his "BIG GUV'MINT" consultant contracts, even while proclaiming loyalty to "tea party" values of attacking government and the public sector, and often did so while serving as a State Senator and belittling public servants elected to the Legislature. Where is the "newspaper" to decry this?

So "it's OK if you're a Republican"? And it's best to ignore the Republican "tea party" darling's real record of triple dipping hypocrisy while attacking Democrats and public servants? And folks wonder why this "newspaper" deserves no credibility as a legitimate source of real journalism?

NV-04: "Newspaper" Again Breathlessly Copies from Republican Press Releases

Just when I thought I could tolerate the local "newspaper" down here, it goes for yet another "story" ripped directly from Republican Party talking points! This time, the "newspaper" attacks Steven Horsford for some financial woes he experienced over a decade ago, when he was in his 20s and struggling to raise two siblings. Oh yes, and he had to dig himself out of a deep and ugly financial hole as the result of being injured in a car accident while he was attending UNR!

"Oh, there goes that evil Steven Horsford again! He's so dastardly, he plays by his own rules! He couldn't even pay his bills after he got injured in a car crash in Reno! OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Here's what I have for both the "newspaper" and the G-O-TEA morons in Washington, DC, who fed them this "story":

FAIL!



Seriously, do the "newspaper" and Nevada Republicans really think this will sink Steven Horsford? Here's a news flash for them: He's not the only Nevadan who's gone underwater financially while trying to provide for the family. And he's not the only Nevadan who's gone underwater financially because of a medical emergency.

By the way, this is why we now have the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Act was passed to prevent tragedies like the one Steven Horsford had experienced.



This is why we saw Nevadans pop up on the steps of the federal building in Las Vegas and Reno last Thursday. And this is why Americans across the country want to see the ACA stay in place. We need health care. And we shouldn't be bankrupted in seeking the care we need.

This is the painful tragedy that Steven Horsford had to live first-hand. And for the "newspaper" and Nevada Republicans to attack him on it is downright shameful. And if they get their way in demanding "judicial activism" in the form of overturning the ACA, expect more stories like Horsford's to surface.

But anyway, getting back to the shoddy journalism at the local "newspaper", couldn't they realize that Steven Horsford's health care related financial woes were not all that uncommon here in Nevada? And didn't they think that reposting this NRCC/Nevada GOP attack verbatim would again call into question whether they really want to be a real "newspaper"? What a #FAIL.

Calling BS on "Newspaper" #NVLeg Prediction

Yesterday, a certain "newspaper" posted this article on the race for the Legislature this year... And the Carson City reporter at the "newspaper" actually managed to repost an entire Senate Republican Caucus press release predict a 12-9 Republican majority in the State Senate next year, as well as expanded Republican numbers in the Assembly. And how, one might ask, did Ed Vogel reach this conclusion? Basically, he gave every marginal seat to the Republicans!

I mean, come on, how ridiculous is that? The only way that happens is if somehow 2012 is another huge "Republican wave election". And as we've been chronicling here for some time, that just isn't likely to happen. If even Rasmussen's latest poll shows President Obama winning Nevada over Mitt Romney by a comfortable margin, then we won't be seeing another "Republican wave election" this fall. And if Nevada Republicans continue to spend more time infighting than organizing, then I have a hard time seeing how some magic "momentum" successfully counteracts the actual organizing that Nevada Democrats are doing on the ground this year.

Not even Ralston was buying that "newspaper analysis" last night.



So what does the real picture look like? Let me help. Since the last time we did race ratings was in October, we were probably overdue for an update anyway. But considering the crazy @ss spin we saw in a certain "newspaper" yesterday, it's definitely time to update the state of the race. And unlike that certain "newspaper", we're not just copying a press release.

Today, we're covering the Senate. (And I'm just listing the competitive races below because the safe seats are all the same as October's initial analysis.) Tomorrow, we'll be looking at competitive Assembly races.

Clark County

SD 5
Henderson- Green Valley/Silverado Ranch

Estimated US-Pres 2008
56% Obama (D)
42% McCain (R)

Estimated NV-Sen 2010
54% Harry Reid (D)
41% Sharron Angle (R)

Estimated NV-Gov 2010
50% Brian Sandoval (R)
45% Rory Reid (D)

Race Rating: Tossup

I still live in this district, so I at least like to think that I know more about what's actually happening in this district than what most media pundits think they know. Basically, SD 5 was reworked in redistricting to become mostly a Green Valley/Silverado Ranch district with just some of Old Henderson remaining. Overall, it transforms the district from what had been considered Republican leaning turf into a more Democratic friendly district.

Still, Nevada Democrats can't take anything for granted here. Former Henderson City Council Member Steve Kirk has been endorsed by the Senate Republican Caucus, and he still has a base of support here. However, he can't take anything for granted here either, as local doctor Annette Teijero is also running in the Republican primary and seems to be emerging as the "tea party" favorite here. While Kirk seems to be leading in the "money race", Teijero and Democratic candidate (and former State Senator) Joyce Woodhouse are getting a head start in the always important field game.

This seat may again come down to the wire, and this seat may again be "bombed" with intense campaign spending, but this time strong Democratic performance at the "top of the ticket" is almost certain to be the key that sends Joyce Woodhouse back to Carson City. While Kirk's early fundraising advantage has me placing this seat in "Tossup" territory for now, I honestly don't think this will be as easy of a Republican pickup as Michael Roberson and most media pundits had originally expected this district to be. (In fact, I won't be surprised if they don't pick up this seat at all.)

SD 6
Las Vegas- Summerlin/Northwest

Estimated US-Pres 2008
55% Obama (D)
43% McCain (R)

Estimated NV-Sen 2010
53% Harry Reid (D)
43% Sharron Angle (R)

Estimated NV-Gov 2010
52% Brian Sandoval (R)
44% Rory Reid (D)

Race Rating: Tossup

If any seat is the ideal example of the high stakes of this year's Legislature elections, it's probably this one. Democrats were already starting to get nervous about this seat when incumbent Senator Allison Copening (D-Las Vegas) faced heat over HOA related legislation she introduced last session. But when Copening announced her retirement in January, the race really opened up. Republicans had already recruited Mark Hutchison, the lawyer who accepted Jim Gibbons' offer to represent Nevada in the anti-health care reform law suit now being argued in the US Supreme Court. However, Democrats had the good fortune of finding 2010 SD 9 candidate Benny Yerushalmi (who only lost to Elizabeth Halseth by about 5%) willing to run in the new SD 6. Thomas Welsh is also running in the Democratic Primary, but so far Yerushalmi looks favored to win that primary.

Most likely, the general election will be the big fight here. And already, Yerushalmi vs. Hutchison vies to be the among the key marquee fights for #NVLeg this year. While the new SD 6 is more Democratic than its previous incarnation, it's still a close enough district to leave Benny Yerushlami and Nevada Democrats hardly any room for error. And considering the big money likely heading Hutchison's way, Yerushalmi will definitely need a stronger field presence this time than he did in 2010 to actually seal the deal this year.

SD 9
Enterprise- Rhodes Ranch, Mountain's Edge, Southern Highlands

Estimated US-Pres 2008
58% Obama (D)
40% McCain (R)

Estimated NV-Sen 2010
54% Harry Reid (D)
41% Sharron Angle (R)

Estimated NV-Gov 2010
50% Brian Sandoval (R)
46% Rory Reid (D)

Race Rating: Leans Democratic

Of all the critical Senate seats up this year, this one looks to deliver the biggest change. For one, it wasn't even supposed to be up this year... But a surprise resignation by Elizabeth Halseth (R-Enterprise) changed that assumption, and that really changed the whole dynamic of the race for the Legislature. What had been a tough hill for Democrats to climb to hold onto the Senate is now becoming a tough hill for Republicans to climb (yes, really, Ed Vogel & R-J pundits) to flip it.

What really made Halseth's resignation a huge blow for Michael Roberson's hopes of becoming Majority Leader was that SD 9 changed radically in redistricting. What had been a more GOP friendly exurban Western Clark County district is now an ethnically diverse and increasingly Democratic leaning Southwest Vegas Valley district. And like SD 5, all it takes is strong Democratic turnout and good "top of the ticket" Democratic performance to flip this seat.

And by landing a top notch candidate in Justin Jones, Nevada Democrats are serious about picking up this seat this time. "Angry Professor" Fred Conquest is also running on the Democratic side, but it (again) doesn't look like he's running a serious campaign (seriously, his web site still features his failed 2010 Gubernatorial run). I honestly don't think Justin Jones should have a problem getting through the Democratic Primary. And with former Joe Heck & Dean Heller spokesperson Mari St. Martin and "tea party" favorite Brent Jones running on the Republican side, I'm liking Justin Jones' chances in the general election. While Democrats still can't take this seat for granted, I am thinking this is the Senate seat most likely to change hands this year.

SD 18 (Open)
Las Vegas- Northwest/Centennial Hills

Estimated US-Pres 2008
50% Obama (D)
48% McCain (R)

Estimated NV-Sen 2010
50% Sharron Angle (R)
45% Harry Reid (D)

Estimated NV-Gov 2010
57% Brian Sandoval (R)
38% Rory Reid (D)

Race Rating: Tossup

Early on, it looked like the most competition we'd see here would be in the Republican Primary... But that all changed when Kelli Ross announced her candidacy here. Not only does she look like a formidable candidate in her own right, but her husband (Las Vegas City Council Member Steve Ross) will probably help her connect with folks in ways that many Democrats typically can't in this Northwest Las Vegas district.

However, Democrats shouldn't get too giddy about picking up this new seat (created mostly from remains of the old SD 9 and SD 12, and moved here from rural Nevada) just yet. Assembly Member Scott Hammond (R-Las Vegas) doesn't quite have the same "fire breathing" reputation as the guy he replaced, so running against him may not be a cake walk. However Hammond isn't getting a cake walk in the Republican Primary, since fellow Assembly Member Richard MacArthur (R-Las Vegas) is also running, and MacArthur DOES have a "fire breathing" reputation that's endearing to the local "tea party" set here. Meanwhile in the Democratic Primary, Kelli Ross is being challenged from the left by former PTA President Donna Schlemmer.

This may very well be one of those races that's competitive from beginning to end. And perhaps more so than any of the other marginal Senate seats, this one may really hinge on what happens in the primary. Hammond seems to be the less doctrinaire conservative Republican, while Ross looks to be the more moderate Democrat. So of course, their general election asset may turn out to be the key primary liability.


Washoe County

SD 15
Reno- Northwest

Estimated US-Pres 2008
57% Obama (D)
40% McCain (R)

Estimated NV-Sen 2010
54% Harry Reid (D)
40% Sharron Angle (R)

Estimated NV-Gov 2010
57% Brian Sandoval (R)
37% Rory Reid (D)

Race Rating: Tossup

This most definitely promises to be the big #NVLeg marquee race of the north. And the stakes here are incredibly high. Two seasoned legislators are running against each other, and the winner of this race may very well be "the majority maker". This explains why the competition is already turning fierce up north.

As we can see in the above video, Senator Greg Brower (R-Reno) is trying to flip-flop his way to the middle of the road after pivoting quite far to the "tea party" right in last year's NV-02 special election. Meanwhile, Sheila Leslie (D-Reno) had to make a big move of her own, albeit a physical one to a smaller house after her kids moved out of the old house, to run in the new SD 15. And unlike the old Washoe Senate 3 district where Bill Raggio served for nearly four decades, the new SD 15 has only a tiny (about 2%) GOP registration advantage... Yet recent election results show the district to be trending Democratic, which is why Greg Brower and Michael Roberson haven't been resting easily ever since Sheila Leslie's big move.

This may very well be the most expensive #NVLeg race in history once all is said and done. Republicans must win this seat again to have a chance at getting any kind of Senate majority. But if Sheila Leslie wins SD 15 for Democrats, then Democrats are virtually assured of keeping the Senate as well as keeping alive hopes of a possible 2/3 veto-proof supermajority.

---

So this is what's at stake with Senate elections this year. If Republicans win at least four out of the five marginal seats listed above, Roberson becomes Majority Leader. On the other hand, all Democrats have to do is win at least two out of these five races to keep the majority (and I think Dems already have a head start here with SD 9 now on the table). Yet if 2012 turns out to be a great year for Nevada Democrats, President Obama manages to win the state handily again, and Democrats manage to pull a spectacular feat of winning all five competitive Senate races, then Democrats finally achieve that 2/3 veto-proof supermajority that's been enticing them for quite some time.

So what's really possible? Let me conclude by ranking the seats in order of likelihood of changing parties:

1. SD 9 (R to D)
2. SD 15 (R to D)
3. SD 6 (D to R)
4. SD 5 (D to R)
5. SD 18 (R to D)

Right now, I'd stop the flipping somewhere between #2 and #3. Yes, I know, I should be more decisive here! OK, so let's be generous and keep the flipping going all the way to #3. This means Hutchison turns SD 6 from Blue to Red while Leslie turns SD 15 from Red to Blue and (Justin) Jones turns SD 9 from Red to Blue. And this means Woodhouse keeps SD 5 Blue while Hammond or MacArthur keeps SD 18 Red. So in the end, I guess the "newspaper" actually did get the final Senate numbers correct... They just got the parties mixed up. (They say Republicans get a 12-9 majority. I say the current state of play suggests a 12-9 Democratic majority.)

Got to love that "newspaper". ;-)

What a "Stunt": "Free Speech for Me, But Not for Thee"

Yesterday, The R-J posted a ridiculously whiny editorial bashing Shelley Berkley for merely pointing out Dean Heller's voting record and asking him to join her in saying no to secretive Super PAC campaigns here in Nevada. According to The R-J, the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision only affirmed "free speech", and those big, bad "LIB'RUL!!!" women should stop attacking poor lil' Rush Limbaugh and his "free speech" rights to have advertisers pay for time on his radio show so he can continue attacking America's women.

Sorry, R-J editoral board (and all the shortsighted white male pundits who think they have a good point), but give me a f**king break!

There's disgust across the political spectrum for the system we now have that allows for the likes of the Koch family to buy elections whenever they want. Back in January, former Republican Presidential Candidate and current US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) joined with former US Senator Russ Feingold to release this statement on the two-year anniversary of Citizens United.

“Two years ago, the Supreme Court handed down one of the worst, and most radically activist decisions in the Court’s history, Citizens United. Overturning more than a century of settled law, and with an unprecedented naiveté of the political process, the Court charted a course for legalized bribery. Sadly, both Democrats and Republicans are now following the dangerous road of unlimited money in politics. There is no question whether scandal will arise from this decision; the only question is when. On this anniversary, we call on both parties to work together to remedy the obvious damage to our political system caused by the Citizens United decision.”

Another former Republican Presidential Candidate, Mike Huckabee, has also chimed in with his disapproval of the post Citizens United political landscape of unlimited secret money-bombs exploding onto our airwaves.



This obviously is NOT about free speech. Rather, Americans from across the political spectrum are increasingly fearful of a tiny group of super-wealthy donors using their Super PACs to exert massive influence over elections and gain control of government. After all, why is "free speech" no longer free? So now we're all required to raise massive amounts of money just to have the same "free speech" rights as David Koch and Sheldon Adelson?



This is why a 69% supermajority of Americans want an end to this Super PAC madness. Does The R-J editorial board think that's just a "stunt"?

And then, there's Rush-bo. When did the First Amendment guarantee the right to a multi-million dollar national talk radio contract and a full slate of advertisers? News flash to The R-J: It does NOT.

I thought the "free market libertarians" at The R-J believed in the sanctity of "the free market". So how can they legitimately complain about "the free market" determining that Rush Limbaugh's radio show is no longer a valuable commodity? At least 52 advertisers have pulled out of sponsoring Limbaugh's radio show as of last Friday. And last I checked, there's no "First Amendment mandate" for those corporate advertisers to sponsor Rush Limbaugh. Are they just as guilty as Shelley Berkley of "actively working to silence someone" who's been making a living off spewing hateful bile about women?

Yes, Rush Limbaugh has the same First Amendment rights as all the rest of us. And that's all. None of us has a guaranteed right to a multi-million dollar radio contract, and neither does Limbaugh. So if citizens like Shelley Berkley put up petitions to cancel Limbaugh's show and corporate advertisers respond by pulling their ads, that's just the American "free market" at work.

It just sounds to me like the radical "tea party" right (that The R-J loved before it became the new brand of "GOP cool") is pulling its own "desperate stunt" to change the subject because it's now starting to fear a painful loss in its War on Women. Even John McCain is now joining Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and other prominent Republicans in begging G-O-TEA leadership to drop the anti-contraception nonsense.



The polling is looking increasingly ugly for Republicans, so now some of them want to drop the birth control fight in an effort to save face. Others, however, seem to think that the bad poll numbers will just go away if they spin harder and try to turn this into an "attack on religious liberty"... And apparently now, an "attack on free speech".

What a crock of crap.

It's not Shelley Berkley's fault that Dean Heller faces consequences for supporting Rush Limbaugh over Nevada women. Her move to point out Heller's vote to restrict women's access to needed health care is not a "stunt". And her denunciation of Rush Limbaugh is not some nefarious effort to "silence free speech". If G-O-TEA politicians like Heller and "tea party" cheerleaders like The R-J editorial board really cared about free speech, they could have said something when House Republicans denied Sandra Fluke the chance to testify on her own health care.

Did Santa Come Early (for Nevada Democrats)?

In case you were wondering, our 10 of 11 series will continue after Christmas. Don't worry about that. But in the mean time, I just have to interrupt our reminiscing to show you the 8 News Now/R-J UNLV poll that's giving Nevada Republicans "the vapors". (Trust me, we'll tie it all together at the end of this diary!)

President Barack Obama would handily defeat any of the Republican presidential candidates in Nevada if the election were held now, according to an 8 News Now/Las Vegas Review-Journal poll conducted by UNLV's Cannon Survey Center.

With a sample size of 600 registered voters and a 4 percent margin of error, Democrat Obama would defeat his closest rival, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, 45.7 percent to 39.8 percent.

In a presidential caucus, Republicans favor Romney but his closest foe, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, trails within the 6.5 percent margin of error in that particular contest. This result reflects registered voters, but not likely caucus-goers.

The telephone poll, conducted Dec. 12 through Dec. 20, had Obama topping Texas Congressman Ron Paul 45.4 percent to 35.7 percent, Gingrich 47.3 to 35.4, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum 49.3 to 30.9, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman 48.8 to 30.1, Texas Gov. Rick Perry 50.8 to 31.1 and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann 50.2 to 27.1.

Whoops. I guess Americans really are getting tired of "tea party" madness... And realizing that sanity really is a good thing. Hell, the G-O-TEA is now turning voters AWAY (especially if they're gay or not super-rich)!



But wait, it gets worse for Nevada Republicans. It also turns out that Dean Heller isn't all that popular, either.

Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley would defeat Republican Sen. Dean Heller in a nail-biter to represent Nevada in the U.S. Senate if the election were held now, according to an 8 News Now/Las Vegas Review-Journal poll conducted by UNLV's Cannon Survey Center.

The poll of 600 registered Nevada voters showed Berkley edging Heller 44.4 percent to 43.2 percent. But the contest, which will be decided in the November 2012 general election, is well within the poll's 4 percent margin of error. The telephone poll was conducted Dec. 12 through Dec. 20.

Now Heller isn't doing as poorly as Romney-Gingrich-Paul at the top of the ticket, but he's nonetheless in real danger. As we noted on Tuesday, he's fallen from a double digit lead to a tie... And now, perhaps falling behind Shelley Berkley in the US Senate race. Hmmm, I wonder why?



Apparently, Nevadans are smart enough to realize his unbalanced nonsense means less work and more suffering. And they're smart enough to know that the source of Washington's problems lies on Capitol Hill (not The White House). So maybe 2012 won't bring the G-O-TEA another "Red Tide" after all? And in the mean time, Nevada Democrats should probably enjoy these nice stocking stuffers from Santa Claus... Then work their behinds off in 2012 to really make it come true.

"Newspaper's" Heads Explode, Dina Titus Slightly Expands Lead

The local "newspaper" of questionable repute already freaked out when Harry Reid slightly increased his lead in their latest poll, but this REALLY got their heads exploding! Dina Titus just moved to a 47-43 lead against Joe Heck!

And by the way KLAS-8 News Now just released the internals of NV-03 and NV-Sen, so we have a better view of what's actually happening:

- Dina now has a 46-41 net positive favorable opinion with 13% neutral, so there's still some wiggle room.

- Heck is also still in positive territory with 39-31 favorability, but that 31% unfavorable rating is a sharp rise from a month ago.

- Both candidates seem to be holding their own on party loyalists, but Heck is leading 49-39 among Independents while Dina has a slightly better grasp on Democrats (84-7) than Heck does among Republicans (82-9).

Again, I won't even get into the "economic questions", as those look like pure crap. Still, it just tickles me to see The R-J go into full meltdown whenever their preferred candidate can't even win in their poll.