We know what you’re thinking. What are our favorite political races, now that filing has closed? Glad you asked! Here they are, each with a brief explanation:

• Because we love David versus Goliath stories: The lopsided U.S. Senate contest between incumbent Republican John Ensign and challenger Jack Carter. Carter’s got no institutional help, so if he manages to win this one, he’ll be able to say he did it on his own. We’d love to see that just for the look on U.S. Sen. Harry Reid’s face.

• Because we think moderate Republicans are better than hard-right Republicans: The 2nd Congressional District race that pits conservative Assemblywoman Sharron Angle of Reno against Secretary of State Dean Heller. (Oh, Assemblywoman Dawn Gibbons is running, too.)

Angle’s getting lots of right-wing dollars from out of state, but Heller’s moderate views would be a welcome change in Congress. The problem: This is U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons country, where moderate views are valued as much as soy lattes, Birkenstocks and hippe drum circles.

Waiting in the wings: Regent Jill Derby, who has a better chance than any Democrat in recent memory to take this seat.

• Because he takes “sitting congressman” too literally: The 3rd Congressional District race between incumbent Republican Jon Porter and challenger Tessa Hafen.

Nobody should be shocked when a Republican votes like a Republican. But when a Republican appears to be a ventriloquist’s dummy passed around from House Speaker Dennis Hastert to Whip Roy Blunt to former Majority Leader Tom DeLay to new Majority Leader John Boehner like a joint at a frat party, you’ve got problems.

• Because there’s a chance we might someday be mistaken for the governor! We don’t put much stock in state Sen. Bob Beers actually beating front-runner Congressman Jim Gibbons, but if he does, our passing resemblance could turn into big money. Did you guys see that dude who impersonates President George W. Bush at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner? He’s got a license to print money!

And there’s some Democrats running, too: State Sen. Dina Titus versus Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson. Which person the party faithful choose in the Aug. 15 primary will say a lot about what the Nevada Democratic Party is all about.

• Because … well, just because: Once-indicted former Las Vegas Councilwoman Janet Moncrief versus ex-boyfriend Bob Stupak versus ex-Lt. Gov. Lonnie Hammargren, all a heartbeat away from the governorship? Where’s that California real-estate listing again?

• Because we love final justice: The state treasurer’s office is being sought by impeached, disgraced Controller Kathy Augustine, who said she’d have run for a third term if there weren’t term limits. For once, we’re grateful for term limits.

She’s been spurned by the head of her party, Paul Adams, in a gutsy, controversial move, and now all that’s left is spurning by the voters. Spurn, voters, spurn!

• Because everybody hates eminent domain: The attorney general’s race between Republican former judge Don Chairez, who ruled against the city of Las Vegas when it stole land to hand over to downtown casino owners, and Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto.

Chairez has the chops: He can say he laid down the law long before the Supreme Court of the United States legalized government-sponsored land theft in Connecticut. But what if Cortez Masto says she’s against legalized government theft, too? Uh, oh.

• Because we like ethical senators: The District 5 and District 8 state senate races of incumbent Republicans Sandra Tiffany and Barbara Cegavske. These races will be referendums on ethics: Tiffany did business with the state while serving as a senator, which is supposed to be illegal, and Cegavske took a lucrative contract from Chancellor Jim Rogers’ Las Vegas TV station while sitting on the committee that oversees higher education, which is an obvious conflict of interest.

• Because we’re sick of hearing about goddamn helicopter noise: The Assembly District 9 race between attorney Richard “Tick” Segerblom and neighborhood activist Ben Contine. At least this will galvanize Contine and his fellow downtowners and give the rest of us a break from hearing about high-rise condos casting actual and metaphorical shadows over their downtown hipster enclave.

• Because we believe in the rule of law: Nevada Supreme Court Justice Nancy Becker was part of the court majority that in 2003 simply ignored a voter-approved initiative that requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature to raise taxes. It’s been lampooned in law reviews, and the subject of abject disgust in opinion columns (like ours, for instance!). Nobody associated with that ruling has ever had to face the voters they told to bugger off, until now. We wonder if the voters will have a message in reply…

• Because we disike sad spectacles: Democratic titan Myrna Williams is a fixture on the Clark County Commission, and would have had to retire after one more term. But Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, no slouch herself, didn’t want to wait that long, and filed for Williams seat. This will be a battle royale that ends on Aug. 15, with the winner taking all. No matter what happens, a Democratic icon will be felled.

• Because she scares us, sometimes: We wouldn’t run against Republican Clark County Commissioner Lynette Boggs McDonald, despite a 7,000-voter advantage, even if the prize was a date with Janeane Garofalo! She’s scary. Boggs McDonald, that is. Not Garofalo.

• Because nobody should get a free ride: Just when it appeared District Attorney David Roger was going to roll to victory, along comes noted defense attorney Frank Cremen, seeking the job. We suggest a Cross-Exam-Off as a debate format. And who knew Cremen, like Roger, was a Republican?

• Because he’s brilliant. Just ask him: Former Assemblyman Ron Knecht finally found the job that’s right for him, where his personality quirks won’t stand out: university regent. That is, if he can beat three other candidates.

• Because it’s a sweet gig: With Sheriff Bill Young retiring, it’s a three-way contest between Undersheriff Doug Gillespie, ex-Deputy Chief Bill Conger and Lt. Ron Williams. (Oh, lots of other people filed, but these are the three that have the best chance.)

It’s a good thing they don’t decide these things by rank, because Gillespie’s three starts beats Conger’s (former) two stars and Williams’ gold bar. And speaking of Williams, we’re sick of getting his e-mails about corruption, FBI probes, and the like. If he’s got proof of wrongdoing, he should put it out there and let the voters judge. If not, shut up.

• Because we really care: Down in Laughlin, the justice of the peace race … only kidding, readers. We really don’t care that much.

Nobody should be shocked at Friday’s revelations that the National Security Agency has been collecting domestic phone call information on Americans. There are three main reasons for this:

Reason No. 1: The NSA has been spying on Americans for years. The agency was formed in 1952, with the specter of communism haunting the world. In 1975, a congressional investigation found it had been intercepting international communications for 20 years.

Do the math: 1975 minus 20 years equals 1955. So shortly after they put away the office supplies, got settled into their nice new chairs, found out where the bathrooms were and poured some coffee into their new “Speak Up: The NSA is Listening” mugs, they were eavesdropping on calls. And the Red Scare of yesteryear has now given way to the terror scare of the modern age.

Reason No. 2: The Bush administration has shown no regard whatsoever for the Constitution, especially the Fourth Amendment. They, like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who appeared on Meet the Press this weekend, paint a stark contrast: Give up your liberties, or see a city blow up thanks to terrorists. It’s the most vile of false choices, but the modern-day American mind seems ill-equipped to grasp it.

And it’s not just the modern-day American mind. It’s also the mind of people like U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, who actually said in the Los Angeles Times about the program: “Do we want security … or do we want to get in a twit about our civil libertarian rights?”

The only twit, of course, is Lott, who forgot Benjamin Franklin’s famous admonition in the Historical Review of Pennsylvania: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” But Lott long ago demonstrated he was unworthy of the Senate, so his quote should not surprise anyone.

Oh, by the way, senator, it’s “civil liberties,” not “civil libertarian rights.” Either way, you and your ilk are violating them.

Reason No. 3: Private business are all too willing to give up our private information to the government at the mere mention of national security. AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth apparently didn’t hesitate long before giving up the records, which consist of the phone number dialed, the time and the duration of the call, as well as the number making the call.

(NSA computer geeks hope to map out a “social network” that might ferret out terrorists. You might be wondering why they don’t just tap the phone of people who they have hard evidence or at least probable cause to believe are terrorists, and see who calls them. Too easy, American people. Too easy.)

Only Qwest Communications resisted the government’s request, and at great pains. According to USA Today, one NSA representative told the company that its refusal might jeopardize national security, and that the company could lose out on future classified government contracts as a result of failing to turn over the information.

Check this: When Qwest asked the NSA to get a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, the NSA refused. Why? A source told the paper, “They [NSA] told [Qwest] they didn’t want to do that because FISA might not agree with them.”

When shredding the Constitution, folks, it’s easier to get forgiveness than permission.

But let’s not give Qwest too much credit; they way we read the coverage, the only thing that stopped them was the possibility of running afoul of privacy laws and thus opening the company up to a really big lawsuit. (At least one company that did cooperate is being sued.)

“Both the attorney general and the president have lied to the American people about the scope and nature of the NSA’s program,” says ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero. And any government that lies to its people cannot hope for legitimacy. Ditto for any government that violates the central oath of office, loyalty to the Constitution. (Then again, Bush didn’t really get elected the first time around, did he?)

The FISA law allows the government to tap phones in the present, but not to go back to phone companies and demand call records that form what the Los Angeles Times said was a database of 312 terabytes. (A byte is a single character; a megabyte is a million characters; a terabyte is a million megabytes, or 1,000 billion bytes. That’s one big-ass database.)

Does any of this sound familiar? If anybody out there said “Total Information Awareness,” referring to an ill-fated (and supposedly cancelled) plan by the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to mine data from all manner of databases in order — supposedly — to catch terrorists, you’re right on the money. Or so says Kenneth C. Bass III, a former Justice Department lawyer who worked on intelligence policy, in the New York Times.

Since we broke out Ben Franklin, let’s also break out a little John Philpot Curran, who said: “The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.”

Now why do you think that presidential aide/future indictee Karl Rove is running around, scaring Republicans in the hinterlands by saying if the Democrats retake the House, or the Senate, or both, they will immediately set about holding hearings into things like the NSA spying, the run up to the war in Iraq, etc.? Maybe because there’s an outside chance the Democrats will do just that. And what they might find in the warrens of the NSA, the vice president’s office, the CIA, the Pentagon and the White House could be shocking.

And nobody wants to end a presidential term in the slammer, do they?