Every time you read about a poll where someone has a lead of X points with a margin of error of Y, they will say something like "that's within the margin of error." Actually, if it's plus or minus Y, isn't it statistically just as probable that the difference is X+Y, not X-Y?

The importance of Powell's remarks, as Glenn rightly points out, is that in this country, persons of any religion or no religion stand on the same basis for public office as any others. "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." It's not that hard to understand. It means exactly what it says. It comes out of the opposition to England's experience with the Test Act, which required an inquisition into the actual religious beliefs of persons who would hold office under the King.

As a non-Christian, I have watched the discussion of religion in this election in particular with disgust. Powell, whatever his faults (and his enabling of Bush 43's original election is as awful as his speech before the UN), is one of the few who have gotten it close to right. Any American is qualified for office regardless of his or her chosen religion, or choice not to have a religion. It's an illegitimate inquiry. To coin a phrase, it's un-American.

You're exactly right. Given the closeness of the 2000 election, how many people--regardless of race--voted for Bush because he had Powell's imprimatur? I'm guessing in Florida it was more than the difference between Bush and Gore as "decided" by the Supreme Court.

For his troubles, he got marginalized for four years and hung out to dry before the UN, placing his entire reputation in doubt. And now they're of course knocking the house Negro for being uppity. Powell did an awful lot to make his bed, but it's the left, not the right, who have a legitimate bone to pick with him. The right simply eats its own. The funny thing is that John McCain was the guy who used to say that.

That was extremely well-said. But don't say it too loud, they'll once again give us their false outrage. How dare you compare them to George Wallace (actually, it's Wallace's heirs who should be complaining; he showed the ability to learn and grow).

You can rent more than two soft porn movies a week for 21 bucks.

I mean, they can't actually check the foreskin (and that only works for half of us). So (a) they're getting only self-admitted Jews, which would exclude many who wouldn't answer a pollsters question on his or her religion; and (b) they're getting self-described Jews, which of course would include many (my wife and son, for instance) whom the Orthodox wouldn't call Jews. I'm not arguing the premise of the article, but with regard to any question of religion in a poll, there is a lot of noise involved and with Jews (four Jews, five opinions and all that) probably more than usual.

Who was far more of a carpetbagger than either Coleman or Franken could possibly claim to be.

We don't like to talk about it much, but the U.S. Senate is the most anti-democratic institution this side of the Politburo. The idea that Wyoming has the same representation in the Senate as California would never pass muster if it were presented to us for approval in the Iraqi constitution. That two New Yorkers find themselves with a chance for the Senate from Minnesota is just par for the course.

The line judge (at least I think that was the line judge) who made the call was watching with binocular vision in real time in the perfect position to make the call. To overturn it, to have indisputable evidence to overturn it, would require that he had made some kind of mistake. No camera in the world can see as well as binocular vision in three dimensions in real time with an unobstructed view; there will always be some distortion that cannot be accounted for by a referee under a hood on the sidelines.

The purpose of instant replay was to avoid the boneheaded, "I mistook Vinnie Testaverde's helmet for the ball" kind of calls. Just like the so-called Roethlisberger touchdown in Super Bowl XL, the idea that seeing one angle from one camera in two dimensions is indisputable evidence to overturn what someone say in three dimensions is silly.

This article appears right under the Salon 2008 Gift Guide, which is to Christmas what Vegas is to real life. Modest gifts, modest lifestyles: not what our advertising-driven capitalist system will put up with.

is owned by Senator Herb Kohl. Who is Jewish.

I don't think it "saves" the NHL, but it does give the NHL almost perfect publicity for one day, and is the one "must see" event on New Year's Day, which, as King points out, is an almost insane accomplishment given the full century college football owned that day.

The great thing is the NHL clearly doesn't give a hoot about spreading this out among all the teams. I'd love to see it in Montreal one year.

Nearly all were dressed in coat and tie. Mel Allen remarked at one point that it was good the game wasn't played earlier in the summer, because with the stands full, the batters would have all been looking into white shirts in centerfield. People dressed differently back then (I wouldn't know; I was about 13 weeks old at the time).

We were on a cruise that took us to Samana, Dominican Republic on Election Day. I was wearing my "Vote Obama-Biden Nov 4" t-shirt, and a number of our fellow cruise passengers were wearing similar shirts. We could barely make it through the marketplace for all the high fives from the Dominicans. The opportunity is there, Barack. Now comes the hard part.