Nevada's Republican Party

Seriously? You thought you could just call an executive meeting and pick whatever delegates you like, without any regard to the delegates actually elected with much fanfare earlier this year?

As I understand it, the delegates we elected have to choose the national delegates according to state law. That's not something you can ignore when it's inconvenient. Better to have no delegates than to be "represented" by those chosen with no more than a farcical nod to democracy.

"Disarry" has been used often of the Republicans this election cycle. I think it's totally apt. And I hope the lawsuit against the state Republican party manages to uphold the rule of law, not the rule of whims.

Strange Weather

I always thought Nevada was too mountainous for the threat of tornados to be taken seriously. Evidently, the National Weather Service disagrees.

"THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN RENO HAS ISSUED A* TORNADO WARNING FOR SOUTH CENTRAL CHURCHILL COUNTY IN WEST CENTRAL NEVADA...

EXTREME EAST CENTRAL LYON COUNTY IN WESTERN NEVADA... NORTHWESTERN MINERAL COUNTY IN WESTERN NEVADA...

* UNTIL 315 PM PDT* AT 238 PM PDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO NEAR US 95 AT MINERAL-LYON CO LINE...OR 32 MILES SOUTH OF FALLON...

MOVING NORTHEAST AT 13 MPH.* THE TORNADO WILL BE NEAR... US 95 AT MINERAL-LYON CO LINE BY 305 PM PDT...

US 95 AT LYON-CHURCHILL CO LINE BY 315 PM PDT...THE STRONGEST ROTATION WAS LOCATED JUST NORTH OF SCHURZ AT 238 PM PDT. IN ADDITION TO THE TORNADO...

THIS STORM IS CAPABLE OF PRODUCING QUARTER SIZE HAIL AND DESTRUCTIVE STRAIGHT LINE WINDS. TRAVELERS ON US 95 ARE IN THE DIRECT PATH OF THIS STORM.THE SAFEST PLACE TO BE DURING A TORNADO IS IN A BASEMENT. GET UNDER A WORKBENCH OR OTHER PIECE OF STURDY FURNITURE. IF NO BASEMENT IS AVAILABLE..

.SEEK SHELTER ON THE LOWEST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING IN AN INTERIOR HALLWAY OR ROOM SUCH AS A CLOSET. USE BLANKETS OR PILLOWS TO COVER YOUR BODY AND ALWAYS STAY AWAY FROM WINDOWS.IF IN MOBILE HOMES OR VEHICLES...

EVACUATE THEM AND GET INSIDE A SUBSTANTIAL SHELTER. IF NO SHELTER IS AVAILABLE...

LIE FLAT IN THE NEAREST DITCH OR OTHER LOW SPOT AND COVER YOUR HEAD WITH YOUR HANDS. "

I Double-Dog Dare You!

Yes, it's a breach in protocol to skip right to the Double-Dog Dare, but I beg your forgiveness.

I double-dog dare you to watch this video without smiling.

Busy, Busy

I haven't blogged much, I know. Over 2 weeks since my last post. But life's been busy, and I haven't been particularly motivated to post anything.

But for an amusing distraction, enjoy the humor of auto-replace:

"It's hard for me to tell states that they can't impose whatever standards they decide to impose," McCain said. "I want to see Rick (Wagoner, GM’s CEO) sit down with the governor's and ask them what they need."

Wagoner said after the meeting that the company would prefer a national standard rather than state-by-state standards.

“We think the current CAFÉ standards are challenging and we’d like to focus on working on them,” he said.

Wagoner, of course, is refering to the CAFE (something, something fuel efficiency) standards, not Café (a place to enjoy a nice beverage and maybe a sandwich). Why did I find that funny? Perhaps it's a mark of how tired I am.

Let no one think

That ranting about the dangers of appointing [insert opposing ideology here] judges to the Supreme Court is something limited to conservatives. My initial reaction upon reading such editorials is to think that the paper tends to laud and defend the judgement of the court when it agrees with their decisions, and simply asserts that the court gets it wrong whenever it disagrees.

I think that shows a brash lack of humility when talking about people who, frankly, know much more about Constitutional Law than the NYT's editorial board.

And it reminds me that I need to have that same humility when talking about experts on a subject that I happen to disagree with. Because a brash lack of humility and being rather opinionated often go hand in hand.

So perhaps a court that manages to upset people on both sides of the political spectrum is actually one that gets it mostly right.