While I'm pleased for the prospects of democracy in Ohio, I have to say that it sounds like either Ohio's databases suck or their IT people do. (Caveat: Probably the former, though it's also quite possible that the situation is being reported badly.)

I'm a database geek, and while the comparison between databases that was suggested is no doubt harder than it sounds, it's not rocket science, either. The trickiest part by far would be deciding what counts as a real mismatch and what doesn't ... but I think we all can guess how some of the Repubs would want that to work.

I think they'll grudgingly endorse McCain while wishing -- perhaps silently, perhaps not -- that they could endorse Palin.

@ bearpaw1

(Heh, we should get a chat going.)

Proposition 8, if it passes, changes the California Constitution. It would at that point be constitutional, by definition.

No.

State Constitutions CANNOT override the Federal Constitution.

The 14th Amendment is part of the Federal Constitution.

Oh, well, yes that's a point. I hadn't taken it above the CA Supremes.

I certainly see what you mean re the 14th Amendment, but I don't know if the Supremes would agree with us. (Particularly these Supremes.) Theoretically, DOMA should be shot down the same way and/or via "full faith and credit".

But ye gods, how long will it take? Much better to keep the CA Constitution unchanged, if possible.

I'm confused. The Columbus Dispatch referred to this ruling as "a unanimous 9-0 ruling". I mean, isn't that fairly obviously a unanimous decision?

Does anyone have a clue how much newspaper endorsements matter? I mean, the people who've swallowed the "liberal media" crap will take endorsements like these as proof, but do endorsements positively influence undecideds?

Colin Powell - I have to think he will do what's right for the country this time.

-- ChangetheChange

I'd just as soon he kept quiet ... like he should have in February 2003.

Actually, I take back the latter. He shouldn't have kept quiet then, he should have loudly repudiated the crap he was given to present to the world. But no, he only obeyed orders.

Given that "whiteness" -- like race in general -- is a sociological (/economic/political) concept, any meaningful definition is necessarily fuzzy and contextual. Essentially, someone is "white" if they are seen as -- and therefore treated as -- "white" by the people around them. Obviously, this means that your acquaintances and many others are "white" in some contexts and not in others.

In 99.9+% of my life, I'm "white" ... even though I have a significant percentage of "red". [shrug]

Republican attempt to bog down Democratic secretary of state unanimously rejected ...

Republican attempt to bog down democracy also rejected ...

That said, wow, unanimous?! And this is very nearly the same court with the embarrassing Bush v Gore decision in 2000, so spare us the "activist judges" claptrap, trolls.

There's no need for Prop 8. It's a waste of time and energy, and couldn't be permitted to stand if it were to pass anyway.

-- blunderdog

Proposition 8, if it passes, changes the California Constitution. It would at that point be constitutional, by definition.

If Proposition 8 passes, the only way to end this type of discrimination will be to go through the whole process of changing the constitution again.

Thank goodness we in Massachusetts managed to avoid putting discrimination in our constitution.

I've donated to the No On 8 folks and I encourage others to do so as well.

Oh, I almost forgot some more "real" American values: blindly and unquestioningly support the Unitary Executive Theory. Sometimes in order to save democracy, one must destroy it.

Republicans have made a hell of a start on that, haven't they? (Though not without way too much help from way too many Democrats.)

"White" is only really meaningful in apartheid societies. Well, and maybe neo-Nazi rallies, I guess.

Genetically, "whiteness" (or any other race) is meaningless. Sociologically (and economically and politically), it's definitely not meaningless. It'll be lovely when and if we can ditch the whole thing, but right now ignoring it would make it worse, not better.

That whole Socratic thing about the "unexamined life is not worth living"? It applies to societies, too.

... I applaud this.

I remember a few years ago an older relative bitching about white men being "discriminated against". He wasn't pleased when I pointed out that it may seem that way, but what was really going on is that we were becoming less discriminated for.

Sure, neither of us was exactly rolling in privilege. But all other things being equal, we'd very likely have been worse off if we weren't white men.

I don't know about North Carolina, but in at least some states, kicking someone counts as assault (battery?) with a dangerous weapon.

Bingo! (The current California governor and a certain sainted former one, as well.)

I love how Repubs pooh-pooh celebrity endorsements and celebrity politicians ... except for the ones they can scrape up. When was the last Hollywood-Babylon commie-liberal elected to a governorship or any other major office?

I can't recall it, but I know what you mean. Anyway, the fundamental fact here is that the Obama campaign continues to use the word when there are other words available. So there is no going backwards here---just benign opportunism.

Seriously, which other words? What synonym of "erratic" couldn't be seen as at least a subtle dig at McCain's age?

I agree that -- at minimum -- the Obama campaign doesn't mind the age implications behind "erratic". On the whole, in context, that's fine with me. But if for some reason the Obama campaign wanted to be squeaky-clean and avoid ageism while still pointing out McCain's clearly erratic behavior, what word would they use?

I'm not a professional wordsmith, but I have a fair command of the English language, and I can't come up with a synonym that wouldn't be seen as having at least as strong an implied reference to McCain's age.