Nay

How can a state that bans gay marriage (NJ, HI) be on anyone's list as one of the top 3 friendliest to gay marriage?  They're friendly enough to ban it.

Only because Christie vetoed it.  We poll at 65% support for SSM. 

Christie polls at 60%+, too, despite his opposition to gay marriage.  Polling is irrelevant if a gay marriage can't get enacted into law in New Jersey.  A state that bans gay marriage isn't friendly to it, by definition.

I'm surprised it wasn't Gaugdano.

Guagdano is on the ballot in November.  It would be a little tough for her to campaign from Washington, D.C.

So Christie appointed a not-so-well-known lawyer caretaker to the temporary seat, like Manchin did with Carte Goodwin.

How can a state that bans gay marriage (NJ, HI) be on anyone's list as one of the top 3 friendliest to gay marriage?  They're friendly enough to ban it.

An October election is pretty stupid. I understand his implicit rationale, but it's clearly a waste of taxpayer's dollars for partisan gain.

I think one problem was that if the election were held on general election day as a default under the statute, there would be no primary, since New Jersey's general election primaries are being held today.  In his remarks today, Christie was adamant about party leaders not selecting the candidates.

Isn't this resolved by allowing a special election's primaries to be held later?

That depends on whether the law allows the governor to call for a special election primary only or could have called for a "special election" on the general election day to get around the fact that the general election primaries have already been held.  The law is far from clear on either.

An October election is pretty stupid. I understand his implicit rationale, but it's clearly a waste of taxpayer's dollars for partisan gain.

I think one problem was that if the election were held on general election day as a default under the statute, there would be no primary, since New Jersey's general election primaries are being held today.  In his remarks today, Christie was adamant about party leaders not selecting the candidates.

Morally, the Democrats shouldn't be obligated to behave if Christie won't behave.  And it shouldn't be just state Democrats; it should be national ones as well.  The governorship has practically been conceded for the next four years, anyway, so it won't do the Democrats any harm by acting just as the Republicans have since the day Obama took office.

Appointing someone of your own party to fill a Senate vacancy is not misbehaving.  It is what any governor is expected to do, absent something in the law requiring otherwise.  

Every New Jersey state assemblyman and state senator are up for election this year, when Christie is expected to do well at the top of the ticket.  If seen as misguided, Democrat legislative misbehavior could easily backfire into job loss.

If Christie's smart, he'll just call a special election.  If he picks a Republican, then Democrats shouldn't be expected to try meeting the Republicans halfway on anything until the special election winner is sworn in.  Either that, or he should pick the biggest RINO ever to call themself a Republican.

There's not going to be a one-off special election, and Christie would nominate someone even if there were a vacancy for just a week, anyway.  Keeping a Senate seat vacant is a disservice to the state.  A one-off special election would cost the state millions of dollars and is unnecessary when there are general elections in November 2013 and 2014.

Why should Christie doing what is expected of any governor (naming a person from their own party to fill a Senate vacancy) lead to bad behavior by Democrats?  It's not like he's doing something no other governor in a similar situation has done ever.  State Democrats aren't going to act like spoiled brats just because of who Christie appoints.   That might backfire in an election year when Christie is expected to win big.

Any chance of appointing Whitman as a placeholder?

Yes.

The North Dakota oil boom town of Williston was the fastest-growing city of 10,000 or more in the past year, followed by Saratoga Springs, UT (west of Provo) and Prosper, TX (north of Dallas).

I don't think any groups involved in politics should be tax exempt period. When conservative groups pop up with tons of money to run ads and such, it does raise questions. The IRS has every right to scrutinize applications for tax exempt status if a group seems to be too political to be deemed tax exempt. No organization is entitled to tax exempt status, there are specifications.

The point. Political groups can style themselves as 'educational' when the only 'educating' that they do is to give hints that certain politicians are to be preferred.

If I give money to a political party or the campaign fund of a politician, then I rightly get no tax break. It is not as if I am making a donation to a welfare hospital or famine relief because such is charity from which I have little cause for expecting benefits.

To allow people to take tax deductions for contributions to political campaigns subsidizes people trying to buy political influence. A tax-exempt organization also gets a break on state sales taxes, also a subsidy.

You can call a bull a cow, but it will still not give milk. 

Most of the political-leaning organizations organize as 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations.  While the organizations themselves are generally tax-exempt, contributors are not allowed a tax deduction for their contributions and amounts spent on direct political activity (i.e. advocating a particular candidate) are taxed.

I am not aware of any Occupy Wall Street candidates or Occupy Wall Street Super PACs.  Are you sure you know what Occupy Wall Street is... was?

Yes.  Occupy Wall Street was a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) radical liberal group that violated the law in the name of civil disobedience.  Five of their members were arrested for planning to blow up a Cleveland bridge.   

There was at least one attempt at an Occupy Wall Street Super PAC.  And there were plenty of candidates who called themselves Occupy Wall Street candidates or tried to ingratiate themselves with the movement in its hey day.

[radical liberal group?]

What if it had been a Republican-controlled IRS doing the same thing to a radical liberal group?

Name one.

Occupy Wall Street.  Radical liberals, some of whom thought it would be a good idea to blow up a bridge in Cleveland.

There is no excuse for what the IRS did here, which is add an additional level of scrutiny to groups that likely oppose the Obama regime.  Using the IRS to attack political enemies is a disgusting misuse of power.

Charleston just went to Sanford. It's over.

Colbert-Busch won the absentee vote in Charleston County, but is losing an overwhelming majority of the election day precincts.

That New York State Senate map that DINO Cuomo signed into law certainly has some population deviation issues.

None of the New York Senate (or Assembly, for that matter) districts had a deviation of more than 10%.  It is well within the safe harbor of permitted deviation.  Kentucky's old map isn't within the safe harbor after the 2010 census.

What's the island in the upper left inset?  Guam?

Anthony Weiner must have granted interviews with every local TV station today, laying the groundwork for a run for mayor.  It looks like he's in.

[Official Ballot]

Official Ballot

Assembly

[1] Goldwater (Federalist Party - Delaware)
[4] bore (Labor Party - Rhode Island)
[3] Snowball (Labor Party - New York)
[2] Write-in:Matt from VT (Federalist Party - Massachusetts)

[AT-LARGE SENATE]

AT-LARGE SENATE

[  ] Alfred F. Jones of Puerto Rico
^{Labor Party}

[1] HagridoftheDeep of South Carolina
^{Federalist Party}

[  ] Kalwejt of Vermont
^{Liberal Party}

[2] Matt from VT of Massachusetts
^{Federalist Party}

[  ] MaxQue of Colorado
^{Labor Party}

[4] Mr. X of Ohio
^Independent

[3] Napoleon of Connecticut
^{Liberal Party}

[5] Poirot of New York
^Independent

[  ] Write-in:______________________________


[  ] None of the above

I don't want to delve into conspiracies here, but I'm concerned that, if this turns out to be more than an accident, there could easily be a connection with the ricin letters and Boston bombing.

There is no connection between the alleged ricin letters and the Boston bombing.  The ricin letters were allegedly sent by Paul Kevin Curtis from Mississippi, who has been arrested.  There is no evidence that Curtis was anywhere near Boston on Monday and he's in police custody now, so there is no way he had anything to do with the fertilizer plant explosion near Waco.

Judging from his Facebook and Meetup pages, any grand conspiracy involving Paul Kevin Curtis would be that of a mentally unbalanced Democrat who is interested in the environment and social movements, not some vast right wing conspiracy that has something to do with avenging Waco.

This must be just an unfortunate coincidence, but should things get worse, it would begin to look like a novel I read a few years ago, called "The Overseer" (By Jonathan Rabb)

I initially thought it was a coincidence (as I mentioned in the OP), but thinking about it more, it seems like foul play has got to be considered a strong possibility if not likely, given that we are just two days away from the 20th anniversary of the Branch Dividian raid, which took place in Waco, Texas....and this plant is near Waco.  I mean, what are the odds that a fertilizer plant would accidentally go off like this in this particular part of the country at this particular time?

Odds that this was just an accident are high.  Fertilizer factories are inherently unstable.  Accidents happen all the time - often with deadly results.

There reportedly was a fire at the plant that firefighters were trying to put out before the explosion.

BREAKING: Arrest made in ricin mailings, federal officials say; suspect IDed as Kenneth Curtis of Tupelo, Miss.

(NBC News)

Now they're saying the suspect's name is Paul Kevin Curtis of Corinth, Mississippi.

I'm guessing that this isn't related to the bombings, but it is a possibility that someone who didn't like Wicker's vote for cloture decided to go psycho over it.

Or it simply was was a false positive.  The envelope was reportedly tested three times, supposedly coming up positive once and negative or inconclusive twice.

Plus, the sender is someone who frequently writes to lawmakers, per Senator McCaskill via Politico.  So if real, I doubt this is part of some grand conspiracy or had anything to do with a particular vote.

The Saudi suspect story has been removed.

No it hasn't:

Authorities ID suspect as Saudi national in marathon bombings, under guard at Boston hospital
New York Post

New York has special-purpose districts with elected commissioners, like fire districts in areas outside of cities and villages and grandfathered elected garbage, water and sewer districts, particularly on Long Island.  Virtually no one but firefighters and their relatives vote in the fire district elections, which aren't held on regular election days, further minimizing turnout.  As a result of this bizarre system, fire districts tend to buy everything under the sun, and Long Island has more fire apparatus than New York City and the city and county of Los Angeles combined.

It's a system Torie would love to hate, and one of the reasons why property taxes on Long Island are so high.

Much larger CSA (Philadelphia-Reading-Camden CSA).

Sussex is part of the Salisbury metropolitan area.

Sussex's inclusion in the Salisbury MSA is a relatively new development.  Last decade, Sussex County was part of one of the largest micropolitan areas in the country, named after the Sussex County town of Seaford, IIRC.  It wasn't even part of Salisbury's larger CSA, which only included counties in Maryland.