Our friend DemfromCT writes an interesting post on coverage of polls by the Media. He writes:

[T]he networks are invested in having a close race. Now, this is tough to prove, but it isn't exactly rocket science. A blowout election is not ratings sustainable the way a close race is.

Well, that may be, I am not much convinced by that argument. But I do know the Media has biases. NBC's bias against Hillary Clinton was something unavoidable for any honest observer. Which brings me to this part of Dem's piece, which does not bring "all the news":

The faculty and students who walk the beautiful grounds of Vermont Law School are paying a price for their principles:

The Vermont Law School is one of two law schools in the nation that bar military recruiters, as a protest against the 15-year-old rule that prevents openly gay men and lesbians from serving in the military. As a result, the school is denied some federal research money — $300,000 to $500,000 a year by one outside analyst’s estimate.

Repealing the Solomon Amendment should be on the list of tasks to accomplish within the first 100 days of a Democratic presidency.

Here's a thought:

It's the job of the government to be thoughtful and rational in dealing with criminals.

An editorial in The Des Moines Register chastises both presidential candidates for criticizing the Supreme Court's decision prohibiting execution as punishment for sex crimes that do not cause death.

Wednesday's ruling is a victory because it further narrows the reach of the death penalty, an uncivilized practice in 21st-century America. ... Killing criminals, whether murderers or rapists, accomplishes nothing. The Supreme Court - and the country - should be working toward abolishing the death penalty, not finding new opportunities to apply it.

While I think very little of the dkos diary Jeralyn admired, I think this one is worth considering. It is a shame that it took blatant sexism for the diarist to see the problem, but it is great that he now see the problem.

Post Script - Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I thought the diary was quite admirable. I salute prose for it.

Our friend Ben Masel has a good action diary on FISA.

This is an Open Thread.

Ann Althouse writes:

I voted for Obama in the Wisconsin primary in part because I predicted he'd turn out to be flexible and pragmatic. I do agree with Krauthammer that it's funny the way the people who fell for the Obama of the primaries — who, unlike me, actually liked those positions he was taking — are letting him get away with the flipflop. I suppose, just as I convinced myself that the real Obama was not the one I was seeing back then, they are convincing themselves that the real Obama is not the one they are seeing now.

(Emphasis supplied.) Sully writes:

[Obama] is impressive precisely because he is neither a pure Adlai Stevenson nor a protean Bill Clinton. He's more like Jack Kennedy: cunning, ruthless, capable of political positioning as much as greatness.

More . . .

With good reason, almost nobody believes that it should be legal for an adult to have sex with a ten year old child. But what about the 18 year old who participates in a sex act initiated by a 16 year old? What if the 16 year old lied about his or her age to the 18 year old?

The age at which a teenager is legally entitled to consent to sex varies from state to state, but tends to be in the range of 16 to 18. Some states treat "statutory rape" as a less serious offense if the adult and minor are not separated by more than 4 years of age. Some permit a defense of "mistake of age," but most do not.

Two years ago Ireland's Supreme Court struck down a statutory rape law because it did not permit a defense that the adult was reasonably mistaken about the minor's age. The Director of Public Prosecutions supports a referendum to restore the "strict liability" law; that is, mistake of age would not be a defense. Meanwhile the Irish parliament struggles to replace the law. It must decide whether to set an age at which the defense of mistake will not apply, and where to set the age of consent. Here's one view that American states would do well to adopt: trust juries. [more ...]

On Obama, McCain and Robert Stone's Dog Soldiers, a really good diary by Blueness at Daily Kos. I especially like the parts about FISA and criminal law, about how of course we are going to be disappointed in Obama from time to time, but that's no reason not to support him for President.

A few quotes below, but there is much more, so go read the whole thing.

This is an open thread.

Republicans to Bob Barr: Don't run.

Bob Barr to Republicans:

“ ‘Well, gee, you might take votes from Senator McCain,’ ” Mr. Barr said this week, mimicking one of the complainers, as he sat sipping Coca-Cola in his plush corner office, 12 stories above Atlanta. “They all said, ‘Look, we understand why you’re doing this. We agree with why you’re doing it. But please don’t do it.’ ”

But with the Libertarian nomination in hand, Mr. Barr hopes to follow in the footsteps of Ross Perot and Mr. Nader, whose third-party presidential bids wreaked general-election havoc.

There's nothing quite so much fun as wreaking havoc on the Republican Party. Barr doesn't have much in the way of money or organization, but every vote he can siphon away from Republicans disgruntled with McCain is valuable. Go to it, Bob!

Michelle Obama had these encouraging remarks about her husband's positions on gay rights at a fundraiser this week:

A world where together we work to reverse discriminatory laws like DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. A world where LGBT Americans get a fair shake at working hard to get ahead without workplace discrimination.

..... And, a world where our federal laws don't discriminate against same-sex relationships, including equal treatment for any relationship recognized under state law.

More...

The LA Times reports that Sen. Barack Obama is "shifting towards the center" and adopting views Republicans would be comfortable with. Examples:

A handgun ban. The death penalty. U.S. wiretaps. Iran and Israel. Trade. On all of those issues, he has recently staked more moderate ground.

Barack Obama, as he introduces himself to the broader voting public, is emphasizing centrist -- even conservative -- positions on hot-button issues.

[More...]

Alan Beaman has always denied killing his "on again, off again girlfriend." A jury nonetheless convicted him in 1995. Last month, the Illinois Supreme Court concluded that the outcome of his trial may have been different if prosecutors hadn't withheld evidence implicating another of the murdered woman's boyfriends.

In an opinion by Justice Thomas Kilbride, the court said evidence against Beaman was “not particularly strong.”

“We cannot have confidence in the verdict finding (Beaman) guilty of this crime given the tenuous nature of the circumstantial evidence against him, along with the nondisclosure of critical evidence that would have countered the state’s argument that all other potential suspects had been eliminated from consideration,” Kilbride wrote.

The prosecution, unwilling to admit that it may have convicted the wrong man, intends to bring Beaman to trial again. A couple of days ago, he was released on bond. After spending 13 years in prison, the things he enjoyed during his first few hours of freedom included: watching the sunrise, chewing gum, and playing with dogs.