Businesswoman Barbara Lee Woollen is suing state Treasurer Brian Krolicki over those ads alleging that Woollen’s movie-production company leased equipment to dirty-movie makers? Now that’s not very Republican!

Remember when Republicans were against trial lawyers? Now, U.S. Sen. John Ensign’s bill to outlaw taking a minor across state lines to get an abortion allows parents to sue the person who took her.

Has the world gone crazy? Or have Republicans finally recognized the legitimate and valuable role lawyers play in contemporary society?

Doubt it. Woollen’s lawsuit — which looks legally lame to us — was designed to strike back at Krolicki, who in turn was striking at Woollen, who in turn had made immigration, not tourism, the No. 1 issue in the governor’s race.

And Ensign, well, in the defense of life, extremism, even embracing the trial bar, is no vice. This is the “values agenda” they’re trying desperately to enact before the November election, after all.

Anybody up for a game of Quote Deconstruction? OK, let’s play! (Our deconstructions are in italics, to avoid confusion.)

• “This is one of the biggest issues of the day: the right to have an abortion. It splits America. We need to look for common ground, where we can come together and have some reasonable restrictions on abortion.” — Ensign.

But wait: If abortion really is a “right,” then why the hell do we need to agree on restrictions? And if it really does split America, then how does a law placing restrictions on it bring the country together? Is it possible, just possible, that Ensign doesn’t really care about finding common ground, and that his real goal is to chip away at a “right” he doesn’t like?

• Ensign cited polls that show 80 percent of Americans believe there should be limits on teen abortions.

So if 80 percent in polls said abortion should be a sacrosanct right, Ensign would stop his attacks on it and leave women alone? If 80 percent on polls said they wanted the U.S. out of Iraq, Ensign would introduce the legislation? Where’s the magic number? Is it 80? Or 70? How about 60? If 50 percent of the people voted for Al Gore in 2000, shouldn’t he be president, Sen. Ensign? (And they did, by the way.)

• “Transporting minors across state lines to bypass parental consent laws regarding abortion undermines state law and jeopardizes the lives of young women.” — President George W. Bush

Oh, really? How are their lives jeopardized, assuming they’re being taken to qualified doctors in another state? And would they be safer going to qualified physicians in states where the practice was legal or unqualified physicians operating under-the-radar in states where it’s not legal?

And when did seeking relief from one state’s laws in another become wrong? Will Bush allow the IRS to help the California Franchise Tax Board track down rich people who live in the Golden State but claim Nevada residency to avoid California taxes? They are, after all, undermining state law, aren’t they? Catch the lawbreakers, Mr. President!

• “We should all be able to agree the best way to reduce abortions is to reduce teen pregnancies. And the proven way to protect [teenagers] is by comprehensive education.” — U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.

This is an example of what we call “common sense,” which dies on the Senate floor faster than Ensign can run the bases at a congressional softball game. Sure enough, it died, 51-48. For the anti-education senators, click here.

• “My company did not work on [the films]. People come to our company [to get] our equipment, they load it on their trucks and they take it away.” — Barbara Lee Woollen, defending herself from charges her company’s equipment was used to shoot porn.

That’s right, folks. She didn’t work on adult-oriented films! How was she to know what films they’re going to use her equipment for? (Although, quite frankly Barbara, it might be a good idea to give that equipment an extra-through cleaning when you get it back, if you know what we mean.) Then again, if people just grab the equipment and go, they could be making all manner of horrible, filthy mateiral! They could do snuff films such as The Passion of the Christ or even an Ann Coulter video! Maybe it’s time somebody at Woollen’s company took a greater interest in the business?

• “Congressman Porter takes his marching orders from his constituents. A memo is not going to tell him how to conduct his congressional business over the recess.” — T.J. Crawford, the (only) public voice for Nevada’s 3rd District representative in Congress. Apparently, Republicans (literally) printed up talking points for members of Congress to use in their home states during the August recess.

We don’t have a joke here. We just put it in because the quote itself is the joke, since Porter’s been taking marching orders from party leaders for about four years now. If only there was some way Southern Nevada could get a real independent representative in Congress.

• That’s sure a relief. It turns out that state Treasurer Brian Krolicki dislikes illegal immigrants just as much as businesswoman/porn film equipment renter/porn hater Barbara Lee Woollen. As anyone with a TV knows, Woollen has made fighting illegal immigration her No. 1 priority, even though the Nevada lieutenant governor has as much to do with immigration issues as traditional Republican values do with … well, porn films.

But today, Krolicki made it official with a news release: He doesn’t like the immigrants much, either. Let’s join the statement, already in progress:

“Considering that illegal immigration is not under the purview of the lieutenant governor’s office, the issue has never been broached by anyone during this campaign.

“For the record, Brian Krolicki strongly supports fully securing our borders and continues to oppose the use of the Millennium Scholarship by unlawful residents.

“In 2003, Brian Krolicki attempted to include an area on the Millennium Scholarship award form that would have required potential scholars to declare their citizenship. Those who were unlawful residents would not have been able to utilize the scholarship.

“An opinion from the Nevada attorney general’s office in 2003 determined that the state treasurer is not permitted by statute to determine eligibility, and that the responsibility fell to the Board of Regents or the legislature.

“In August 2003, the Board of Regents declined to address the issue, referring it to the Legislature, and in 2005 Treasurer Krolicki included in Millennium Scholarship legislation a requirement for all Millennium Scholars to submit a FAFSA to the federal government.

“This would have required a valid Social Security number, and would have determined which students were ineligible. The Legislature refused to include this language in the version of the bill that passed.”

See, Barbara Lee Woollen! Krolicki worked very hard to deny state funds to high-achieving immigrant children, thus ensuring they couldn’t go to college on the dime of tobacco companies, from whose settlement money the Millennium Scholarship funds were pilfered in the first place! So don’t go around thinking you’re going to ride the hate parade into the lieutenant governor’s office, baby. Big K is right there with you, with a record that shows he’s done more in government to screw illegal immigrants than you ever have. So why don’t you just go back to making dirty pictures and let him go back to Carson City … which is pretty much the same thing.

Whew. Glad that debate is over. Now can we please get back to the real No. 1 issue in this race: Who looks better standing behind the rostrum in the Senate chambers, calling on Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio to do the real work of the upper house?

• Our hearty congratulations to U.S. Sen. John Ensign for being named by The Hill newspaper as one of the 50 most beautiful people on Capitol Hill. (And our hearty thanks to the Las Vegas Gleaner for bringing this prestigious honor to our attention in today’s edition.)

The write-up for Ensign includes his “battle” with U.S. Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., for the title of fastest man in the Senate. (Sununu’s secret? Like his dad, he uses government vehicles!) But the article was strangely silent on Ensign’s legislative accomplishments.

Anyway, we know Ensign is predisposed to reading the Bible, which is why we found it odd that he misquoted the Good Book. Sayeth Ensign: “There’s a Scripture that says gray hair is a sign of wisdom. I hope that’s true.”

It’s not, senator! We mean, it’s not true that there’s such a Scripture. Perhaps you’re thinking of Proverbs 16:31, which says, “Gray hair is a crown of splendor; it is attained by a righteous life.” Or Proverbs 20:29, which says “The glory of young men is their strength, gray hair is the splendor of the old.”

Ouch. Ensign’s not that old. (He did miss making the Top 10 Most Beautiful People on Capitol Hill, however. The winners were all quite young.) And he’s still a star of many congressional athletic events, too.

So, keep your chin up, senator. Gray hair may be the splendor of the old, but you’ve still got a hell of a golf handicap. And ol’ Jack Carter, your Democratic challenger in November, sure isn’t going to be showing up on any most beautiful lists. He’ll be forced to beguile voters with his fancy “positions” on “issues” and “statements” on “policy” hammered out with his “reason” and “knowledge.” Who needs that when you’ve got (relative) youth and a freaking crown of splendor?

• You’ve got to fight. For your right. To smoke stuff! Or at the very least, the Nevada Resort Association does.

• Thanks, Sen. Reid! We wax more eloquent in our column in CityLife this week, but we couldn’t let Monday pass without a nod to Harry Reid’s role in getting Nevada moved up — way up — in choosing a Democratic presidential candidate in 2008. The early party caucus, in January 2008, will give the state an unprecedented voice in national politics, and will no doubt see candidates on the stump in the Silver State as never before.

Reid told us in an interview for last week’s cover story that he brings a lot back to Nevada. We had no idea how much, until news of the state’s coup broke Saturday. State Democrats owe Reid a big thank you for this plum, perhaps one of the most important things he’s brought back to Nevada in his Senate career.

• We said recently that Mayor Oscar Goodman would soon enter his final phase in public office, the feces-throwing phase, but we had no idea it would happen so soon. Goodman’s apparently been going around town proposing the stocks for graffiti artists, according to the Review-Journal. He’s even asked the city attorney’s office to research whether it would be legal, or a violation of the Bill of Rights’ ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

So, let us get this straight: A former criminal defense attorney, ostensibly trained and practicing in the area of constitutional law, doesn’t know whether putting a tagger in the stocks and letting passers-by throw paint in their faces, is unconstitutional or not?

And, in order to find out, he’s asked city lawyers to spend time looking into the matter?

It’s either that, or Goodman’s need to see his name in print and face on TV has overcome what’s left of his gin-addled mind. Either way, it’s not good. Is there any provision in the Municipal Code to remove from office a man who’s apparently gone bat-shit crazy?

• So the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce endorsed U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons because he represents the interests of the business group? That’s what a chamber spokeswoman told the Las Vegas Sun this weekend.

We don’t buy it, however. Consider this: Gibbons has come out in support of an increase in the minimum wage. The chamber opposes it. Gibbons wants collective bargaining, at least for state corrections officers. The chamber has always opposed that. Gibbons has been named “porker of the month” by Citizens Against Government Waste for a particularly egregious bit of pork-barrel spending. The chamber, we presume, is against pork-barrel spending.

So why does Gibbons represent the interests of the chamber’s members again?

The fact is, state Sen. Bob Beers best represents the chamber’s membership, almost perfectly. Not only is Beers a member and a “prospector” for the group (“prospectors” look to recruit new members), he’s in agreement with the chamber on all of its major issues.

But Beers got overlooked and Gibbons got the nod. Why? Because the chamber saw what everyone else thinks they see, the fact that Gibbons has the best chance to win the race. That, and only that, is why the chamber endorsed him.

So why not just say that? Because it sounds cynical and impolitic. And these days, you don’t want that, even if what you’re saying is true. So the chamber had to put out the party line, and hope people bought it. (Fear not, chamber: Most people probably did. Just not anybody who knows anything about politics.)

A final note: The chamber fudging came in a Sun story about Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt not getting the support she thinks she should because she’s a woman. (Hunt is a longtime businesswoman and chamber member who, like Beers, was passed over for the group’s endorsement.) But the decision had nothing whatever to do with gender. Once again, it comes down to viability.

And in that, the chamber, big gambling, developers and everybody else follows a simple rule: Back a winner. It doesn’t matter if that potential winner is a man, a woman, or a cross-dressing hermaphrodite. Everybody wants to back the winner. Keep that in mind the next time somebody tries to tell you it’s all about “principles” or “interests.” Or the next time a cross-dressing hermaphrodite runs.

• Well, at least state Treasurer Brian Krolicki paid for these ads himself.

Krolicki, running for lieutenant governor, has slammed his primary opponent, businesswoman Barbara Lee Woollen for leasing equipment to the makers of “adult films” and “pornography.” (Research by KTNV Channel 13 reveals the movies and TV series in question are rated “R,” and thus by definition not pornography, but that’s not important right now.)

What’s important is that Krolicki and his campaign are obviously starting to worry that Woollen is starting to attract votes with her one-woman crusade against illegal immigration, which Woollen has pledged to fight as lieutenant governor. (If you’re asking yourself what the lieutenant governor of Nevada has to do with illegal immigration, the answer is, not a damn thing.) But Woollen, who says she’ll introduce bills to deny state benefits to illegal immigrants, is trying to latch on to the most white-hot issue of the times, and trying to bring Krolicki in with her.

So, Krolicki finds that Woollen’s movie company, Cinelease, has rented equipment to some racy movies, and he slams her for going against the Republican values she’s touted in her ads. It’s fair game, as Woollen opened the door wide open by claiming to support Republican values. And the Krolicki ad forced her to lamely declare she’d sue, not to mention forcing her to utter mega-lame quotes like this:

“I can unequivocally say Cinelease does not actively, or knowingly, seek out pornographic projects to rent its equipment to. Personally, I’m offended by pornography. I don’t watch pornography. We’re better off without pornography.”

C’mon, Woollen! You claimed to represent traditional Republican values. And making money is the most traditional Republican value of all, isn’t it? Just because what our friend the Las Vegas Gleaner calls “the churchy wing” of the party doesn’t like it shouldn’t mean you can’t profit on soft-core skin, should it? Just so long as the grips are bona fide U.S. citizens, right?

Anyway, this marks a change in the Krolicki ad strategy. Heretofore, he’s mostly used ads paid for by private firms involved with state programs like the prepaid tuition thing to showcase him … you know, doing stuff. This ad, however, was paid for by his campaign. And that’s a good thing.

• More Republican values agenda, folks! Just what we need after our long, dark night of … five plus years of Republican rule? Anyway, our very own fertilized-embryo-loving U.S. Sen. John Ensign is back, with a bill that would make it illegal to transport a minor across state lines for the purposes of obtaining an abortion in order to skirt state-level parental consent laws. In an odd twist for the trial-lawyer-hating Ensign (c’mon, senator, they were once fertilized embryos, too!) the bill would allow parents to sue violators.

Democrats and pro-choice forces have responded that the bill would hurt teens whose pregnancy was the result of incest, and, shockingly, the first draft doesn’t have an exception for that. (Republicans say they’re working on an amendment.) But the real story is twofold, and brought to us by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office and our other senator, Harry Reid.

CBO says: The bill won’t cost much to enforce, since the practice of transporting teens across state lines to get abortions is rare. And,

Harry Reid says: “As important as people feel this issue is, how does it compare to what’s going on Iraq? How does it compare to what’s going on in the lives of Americans trying to pay for their gasoline?”

So, Ensign has a bill to ban a crime that hardly ever happens, while he and his caucus ignore bigger issues. In fact, let’s do the lists, shall we?

Republican Priorities (as exemplified in the party’s “values agenda”):

1. Ban flag burning

2. Ban gay marriage

3. Ban federal funding of potentially life-saving research into embryonic stem cells (aside from existing stem cell lines).

4. Protect words “under God” in Pledge of Allegiance by banning court rulings on the topic.

5. Banning rare crime of transporting teens across state lines to get abortion, in order to skirt parental notification laws.

Actual Priorities (as exemplified by a little thing we like to call “reality”):

1. Finding a solution to the crisis in Middle East

2. Finding a way out of the ongoing fiasco that is the Iraq occupation

3. Dealing with the record deficit and record national debt

4. Dealing with the lack of preparation for major storms

5. Dealing with the axis of evil: Iran getting nuclear weapons and North Korea testing their missiles

6. Dealing with global warming/environmental problems

7. Dealing with soaring and sustained high gasoline prices

8. Dealing with the total lack of intelligent, forward-looking energy policy

You know, now that we think about it, the real Republican agenda (you know, the one that rewards rich people and rich corporations at the expense of regular people) has actually caused or made worse many of the items on the reality-agenda list.

We’d call on the GOP to address some of the items on the latter list, but we know how zygote-crazy they get every even-numbered year. Let’s just hope that those being pandered to — they’re called “values voters” — decide they, too, want action on some of the real problems. What will the GOP do then? Oh, how we’d love to find out!

Sorry we’re late today, dear readers. We hate when our full-time job starts to interfere with blogging, which we enjoy much more. Don’t tell anyone.

So on with the Quick Hits!

• The thing about the Tax and Spending Control is, you have to suspend your disbelief, like you were watching a horror movie or Fox News.

So when financial experts say that if TASC were in place a few years ago, we’d be totally, horribly, irreparably, and inconceivably fucked, as they do (in not so many words) in this Review-Journal story, the TASC masters just have to pretend everything’s OK.

“We don’t want to look back. TASC would not cut a single thing from the budget,” says poor TASC campaign manager Bob Adney. “TASC does not cut anything. It allows government to grow, but with a ceiling.”

Actually, he’s managed to tell the truth while fibbing, all at the same time: The whole truth is, TASC doesn’t call for specific budget cuts. But if it’s implemented, it would restrain spending in such a way that lawmakers will be forced to cut the budget. So, in effect, TASC would require budget cuts.

And readers, those cuts may not be pretty, the story demonstrates. Read it, and glimpse a grim future.

• You know, if they didn’t get state-issued tax free bonds, skip out on paying their taxes and use mega-juice to jam a project over on the common people, we’d actually feel sorry for the Las Vegas Monorail.

On the very same day we learn that ridership is lagging below even the most critical estimates, state Sen. Dina Titus goes and points out all the connections between the train and her gubernatorial rival, Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson. (Gibson served on the board and as president of the monorail, at a very lucrative salary.)

It never rains, but it pours.

• Republicans bravely continued their struggle to implement their “American values agenda” in Washington, D.C., by trying to put the Pledge of Allegiance beyond the review of federal courts. Like Christmas, the pledge has been under assault since a California atheist, obviously acting under orders from Satan, sued to eliminate the words “under God” from the pledge.

The House vote was 260-167, and included culture warriors U.S. Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter on the “aye” side. (Both are running for office, Gibbons for governor and Porter for re-election.) U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, who says she believes in something about the separation of powers, declined to join in.

“We should not and cannot rewrite history to ignore our spiritual heritage. It surrounds us. It cries out for our country to honor God,” said U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., partially plagiarizing Ben “Obi-Wan” Kenobi from Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope.

Yes, we must preserve the heritage of the pledge! You know, the heritage that was written by socialist editor Francis Bellamy in the 1920s and adopted by Congress in 1945. The heritage created by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1954, when in the midst of fighting godless communists, Congress inserted the words “under God” into the pledge. (That’s right, the words go back all of 52 years.)

If the Republicans expect these little shows they’re putting on in Washington (an amendment to ban flag burning, another to ban gay marriage, and this measure to protect the pledge) are going to distract Americans’ attention from the fact that their party has utterly failed in almost every measurable respect, well … they’re probably right.

But still, we couldn’t let it pass without pointing out their cynical charade.

• And finally today, a great irony from a place where irony usually goes to die: The Las Vegas City Council chambers.

On the very same day that the city gave telecommunications giant Cox Communications 7.69 acres of land in West Las Vegas valued at more than $4 million for just $1, it banned the simple act of mercy that is handing a hungry person some food.

That’s right: Cox, which says its annual revenues “exceed $10 billion,” paid just $1 for land near their new headquarters in the old VA clinic off Martin Luther King Drive. (That’s 0.0000000001 percent of the company’s annual revenues!)

But if you feed a person who looks homeless, you’re committing a crime.

That’s our City Hall: Windfalls for those who don’t need any help, and rough treatment for those who do. If there is any more powerful argument to replace each and every person who voted for this measure, we cannot think of what it is. (And they all voted for it, save for Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian, who was absent.)

The only silver lining came from Councilman Steve Wolfson, who torpedoed the city’s legal arguments when he said, “The marshals will get specialized training on enforcement. If you bought a couple of burgers and wanted to give them out, you technically would be in violation, but you wouldn’t be cited,” he said.

Ah, so the city not only intended to deny to certain persons within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, they are training their agents, servants and employees in precisely how to selectively enforce said law? You don’t have to be an ACLU lawyer to see how that’s going to break down before a federal judge.

In the meantime, the Cox suckers down at City Hall need to go.

So, President George W. Bush vetoed a bill today that would have allowed the federal government to spend money on research to use embryonic stem cells to cure disease. The veto is the first in his presidency, but let’s not forget that he’s issued more than 140 “signing statements” on other bills he’s approved which are, in some cases, mini-vetoes anyway. (Think, U.S. Sen. John McCain’s anti-torture bill.)

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid voted for the bill, while U.S. Sen. John Ensign voted against it, saying he considers fertilized embryos to be human life. We can’t agree, given that the embryos would never develop in the labs where they are stored, and would likely simply be discarded anyway. So it’s OK to discard “human life” but not use it to potentially cure disease? We don’t get that.

In any case, it’s very likely that this ends here, since the Senate doesn’t have enough votes to override Bush’s veto (they need 67). It’s just another unfortunate example in the long list of disappointments that is the Bush presidency, which has precisely 915 days left. That’s what Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld calls a “long, hard slog.”

In other Bush news, it was reported by The Associated Press that the president personally blocked an inquiry into the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program, by refusing to grant security clearances to the ethics lawyers looking in to how the program won approval in the first place. No classified information meant no investigation, and thus the inquiry was shut down.

Why? The president said — through his attorney general — that it was a matter of national security. And White House spokesman Tony Snow said, “What he was saying is that in the case of a highly classified program, you need to keep the number of people exposed to it tight for reasons of national security, and that’s what he did.”

But get this: Apparently Bush did give security clearances to Justice Department lawyers and FBI special agents and their grandmothers when it came time to find out who leaked details of the NSA program to the New York Times.

So apparently, once it was out, it was OK to have more people in the government know about it. Fine, then. Let’s have the lawyers from the Office of Professional Responsibility get their clearances now, and investigate how this violation of the Fourth Amendment started in the first place. And while we’re at it, let’s add conspiracy and obstruction of justice charges to the president’s tab, shall we?

Nine hundred fifteen days. That’s sure a hell of a long time.

• You know, readers, sometimes the distant drums of time’s passing call us to new duties and obligations, and the time comes to move on. That was the (actual) bullshit line that Regent Doug Hill gave when he mysteriously abandoned his elected job.

And now we know why! Review-Journal reporter K.C. Howard reports today that Hill had been offered a job by Sunbelt Communications Co. before he left. Sunbelt, of course, is the company owned by Chancellor Jim Rogers.

While Hill’s behavior was most certainly unethical — entertaining a job offer from someone who is allegedly his subordinate without disclosing the same — he only narrowly avoided an even bigger problem. Howard writes that Hill was out of the room when the regents voted on renewing Rogers contract in June; had he voted on that matter with the job pending, he almost certainly would have committed an entirely separate ethical breech.

So, let’s do the list, shall we:

— Ex-Regent Doug Seastrand applies for and gets a job at UNLV, while he oversees UNLV on the board of regents. (In response, regents adopt a one-year “cooling off” period.)

— Regent Linda Howard openly solicits Rogers — ostensibly her subordinate — to donate to her campaign for public administrator, and he does.

— Rogers underwrites travel and a stay in a five-star hotel for regents on his annual Canadian fishing trip, a gift to his elected bosses that nonetheless goes unreported.

— Rogers agrees to pay for Regent Stavros Anthony to travel to Singapore with him to check out the university system’s new hotel college there.

There are so many conflicts, gifts, favors and consideration going back and forth, it’s hard to keep track! Clearly, Rogers is not intimidated by regents. In fact, he functions as their boss. But he shouldn’t be paying for a damn thing for them, and they shouldn’t be soliciting him for a damn thing. It’s wrong, it’s unseemly, and it contributes to the well-deserved reputation the regents have for being the worst public body in America.

Rogers’ riches make him a unique public servant: He doesn’t need the job, and he doesn’t care about pleasing his “bosses.” That’s generally a good thing. But when his bosses are indebted to him in one way or another, it makes Rogers into an unchecked dictator. And that’s always a bad thing.

• Is U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons a Mormon? He says yes, even if his official biographies going back to the late 1980s list him as “Protestant.”

A word about labels: Protestant covers a wide swath of modern-day Christianity, so named because they “protested” the abuses and corruption of the Roman Catholic Church, another great branch of Christianity. Modern examples of Protestants include Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelical Free, Church of Christ and Pentacostals.

Mormons were founded by Joseph Smith around 1830, after he said he’d received a vision indicating that all the current incarnations of the church had strayed from the truth path. (Funny, that’s just what the Orthodox say about the Catholics to this day! Or Orthodox, can’t you get over that filioque clause business?) While Mormons accept the Bible as one of their four foundational books, they wouldn’t be considered Protestants in the traditional mold.

Therein, the dilemma. Gibbons says he may have checked off “Protestant” on a biography form long ago, but that he’s always been a Mormon, long before 2003, when he contemplated running against U.S. Sen. Harry Reid (who is a Mormon) and asked guidebooks like the Almanac of American Politics to change his affiliation.

“I’ve gone to a lot of different churches in my life, from Baptist to Episcopal to Presbyterian to LDS [i.e. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, aka Mormons], but I have always considered myself LDS,” Gibbons told the Review-Journal today. “I am not the most active individual in the church, but I still hold my beliefs and I still believe in the doctrines and principles.”

But wait, Gibbons added: “I don’t lead with my religion. I don’t judge or gauge people on their religion. I am not out there using church rolls and church address books to lay my religion on my sleeve to ask for votes.”

Why, is he saying somebody out there is leading with his religion, using church rolls or address books to lay their religion on their sleeve and ask for votes? To whom could he possibly be referring?

• And finally today, we’re glad to note that Assistant County Manager Virginia Valentine will be promoted to the top job in Clark County come Aug. 11. She’ll be the first woman to hold the post, and responsible for 11,000 employees and a $5.9 billion budget.

Valentine previously worked at the city of Las Vegas, where she was hired by ex-Mayor Jan Jones and worked under current Mayor Oscar Goodman. She took the job at Clark County after a brief stint at the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, where she was in charge of government affairs.

Valentine gets top marks from almost all quarters, and earned a unanimous vote from the Clark County Commission Tuesday. We know she’ll do a great job taking over for another highly qualified government administrator, current manager Thom Reilly.

A word about polls: It all comes down to the methodology and sample size. The larger the sample, the more accurate the result, provided you’re asking question of the right voters. (Inveterate voters, the ones who not only say they’re going to vote on Election Day but who actually have voted on past election days, are the best.)

Having said that, we at Various Things & Stuff can say that Marvin Longabaugh of Magellan Research has always struck us as a good, honest pollster. He’s been doing it for awhile, and his record is pretty darn good. He understands the business and how it’s supposed to work. So let’s address his current and month-old numbers, and see what we can discern.

(The numbers were reported in John L. Smith’s column in the Review-Journal today.)

Here’s the matchup, as reported by Smith:

Jim Gibson: 39.5 percent

Dina Titus: 30.7 percent

Difference: 8.8 percent

Undecided: 29.8 percent

Now, let’s take a look at Magellan’s numbers from last month, also reported by Smith:

Jim Gibson: 38.1 percent

Dina Titus: 28 percent

Difference: 10.1 percent

Undecided: 33.9 percent

So, what conclusions can we draw?

First, it appears the numbers are solid, in that we don’t see big swings from month to month. About 4 percent made up their minds between the current poll and the last one, and those undecideds broke both ways.

Second, although early polls showed Titus ahead of Gibson, those were based on the most ephemeral of factors — name recognition. Gibson’s been on the air with ads, positive and negative, for a couple months, which could account for his surge in these Magellan polls. (In fact, the Gibson education spot in which he laments of schoolchildren, “If we’re last, where does that leave them?” is probably the best ad of the season thus far, even though it lacks specifics.)

Moreover, Gibson’s first-strike assault on Titus in the ad wars would naturally have the effect of lowering her support while raising his. Gibson has reminded voters up north that Titus hasn’t always had kind things to say about them in the past.

Third, Titus hasn’t just sat still. She’s fired back, starting at the end of June. This might explain her cutting into Gibson’s lead, from 10.1 percent in June to 8.8 percent this month. (If only the election were in February 2007, assuming a consistent rate of decline, they’d be even!)

Fourth, the truth of the matter is this: Ads move polls. Campaign appearances move polls. Stories in newspapers and on TV move polls. Debates move polls. And those poll numbers can shift between now and Aug. 15, when, as the politicians like to say, the only poll that matters is taken. (Usually, they say that when they’re behind in the other polls.)

Do the numbers reflect reality? Our unscientific view is that this is closer than an 8.8-point race, but we’ve nothing to base that on, other than gut feelings developed while covering umpteen campaigns. But there is no denying a few things: Gibson is ahead; Gibson’s TV ads have helped him; Gibson’s numbers are much better than when the race started.

But with 11 days until early voting begins and exactly one month until Election Day, our view is that either candidate can still win.

Up next: The Review-Journal’s latest poll, which should hit right before early voting, according to Editor Thomas Mitchell, who told a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce audience recently the next poll would be available then.

We’ll be eagerly awaiting those results.

You know what’s tasty? A burrito stuffed with rice, black beans, sour cream, salsa and big chunks of Quick Hits! We’ll take ours ranchero style!

• Attorney General George Chanos read the law about re-importing Canadian prescription drugs so narrowly, he ruled the program illegal in a decision that was immediately and vigorously ignored by pretty much everybody. But now, Chanos is back, with a much more liberal and expansive reading of the law: Despite the fact that there are more than one version of the Tax and Spending Control (TASC) petition out there, it can still go on the ballot. No worries, mate.

Don’t you just hate flip-floppers?

Chanos admitted that the TASC folks had submitted three different versions of the petition to the secretary of state, one of which was circulated to voters. (The law says there should only be one version, so as not to hoodwink voters.)

To be honest, there were more versions of TASC than conspiracy theories about the John F. Kennedy assassination, as backers tried their best to limit government spending to the rate of inflation plus population growth. And some of it had to be re-written, thanks to a lawsuit from opponents.

But seriously, one version will reportedly allow the government to spend $1.3 billion more than the others. That’s a fairly large mistake thanks to a “typo.” (And trust us; we make typos all the time!)

But, Chanos reasoned, voters who signed all wanted essentially the same thing, i.e. limited government, and great weight should be given to the will of the voters. So go ahead and put that bad boy on the ballot.

Not so fast: This initiative has to go to the state Supreme Court first in an inevitable lawsuit. And we’re sure the high court’s justices will give the Chanos opinion the due consideration and weight that it deserves.

• Cox Communications is not a charity. We know, because we pay them for their fine services at our spacious Henderson flat: Digital cable TV, digital video recording, and high-speed Internet access. (Love the Movies on Demand, guys! Keep it up!)

But Cox is set to receive a giant gift from the city of Las Vegas, which is all about welfare so long as the recipient is a huge business that doesn’t actually need it. (SEE, downtown redevelopment and WALTERS, Bill.) According to the Review-Journal’s City Hall reporter David McGrath Schwartz, the city wants to give Cox a seven-acre parcel for just $1.

Oh, there are all the usual excuses. The company is moving into West Las Vegas, and bringing 900 jobs to the area. Economic development. They’re taking over an empty building. Yada, yada, yada. It’s still a parcel of land the city is giving away, one that could have been sold, if not for top dollar, at least for more than $1.

We’ve said it before: The right-wingers have a point when they talk about government officials being too free to spend the public’s cash because it’s not their money. The city has raised to an art form the should-be-illegal practice of making a gift of public funds. It should stop. If the city has run out of legitimate uses of that money (funding police, firefighters, road building and repair, social services, business licensing, building and maintaining parks, and the like) it should start issuing refunds, or seek a decrease in property taxes. Yeah, we won’t hold our breath.

• Speaking of the city, did Mayor Oscar Goodman really tell ex-Councilman Steve Miller to “suck my big toe”? At a news conference?

We’re telling you, folks: The feces-hurling phase is just weeks away. Keep those cameras rolling!

• We see that Review-Journal business reporter Jennifer Robison documented the 61 new businesses that the Nevada Development Authority claims it brought to town during the last fiscal year. Seems Southern Nevada added 1,961 new jobs, with a five-year economic impact of $2 billion. (And those same businesses will pay $79 million to local governments in taxes during that period, and an additional $24 million to the state.)

All of which reminded us of Robison’s 2005 story and sidebar that alleged Nevada’s onerous new taxes — passed by the 2003 Legislature — were simply killing Nevada’s business climate.

Which leads us to wonder: How could this be? The only possibilities are:

a.) The NDA’s dazzling recruitment talent has overcome the state’s oppressive tax burden

b.) The massive reduction in the payroll tax (from 0.65 percent to 0.63 percent) enacted in 2005 has solved everything

c.) The fact that Nevada has no business income tax like surrounding states do, and, even had one been enacted in 2003, it would still have been lower than California’s

d.) Robison’s original story was bullshit

We’re going with “D,” but only because Robison herself has written stories directly contradicting her 2005 piece. Oddly, no correction or admission of error has even been published in the R-J. Yeah, we’re not holding our breath.

• Why does the Review-Journal hate the young people? And why does it hate journalists, as evidenced by this Ann Coulter op-ed column that ran in its pages?

• Did U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons really admit to “extortion” in recent profile in the R-J, as his gubernatorial primary opponent, state Sen. Bob Beers alleges?

To help you decide for yourself, we reprint the relevant passage herein:

“Gibbons tells a curious story about his first term in the Assembly. Perhaps intended to illustrate his ability to stand his ground, it also reads as a tale of political payback.

“The newly elected legislator told Delta, his employer, that he would need a six-month unpaid leave to serve in the Assembly. But unlike his previous airline, Delta didn’t have a public-service leave policy, and Gibbons was told he would have to choose between his job as a pilot and serving in the Legislature.

“Sure enough, when Gibbons went to Carson City he was fired for failing to show up to work. But he soon had a chance to get back at the airline.

“‘The Legislature was increasing the tax on jet fuel, and they put me in charge of the bill,’ Gibbons said. ‘Delta sent a representative to lobby, and guess who they had to come talk to? Me.’

“Because of the way the airline had treated Gibbons, its lobbyist got nowhere with him. Within days, Gibbons got a call from Delta saying he’d been rehired. When he returned to work after the legislative session, the airline had a public-service leave policy.

“‘I couldn’t believe Delta would be so stubborn when it’s so important to have a good relationship with the government,’ Gibbons said. ‘I think it was that lobbyist who went back and said, “This (leave policy) is silly, it could jeopardize our ability to survive.”‘”

We’re not lawyers or anything, but, to us, that that doesn’t just sound like a tale of political payback. It sounds like a public officer using his position in government to grant an unwarranted privilege, preference or advantage for himself.

Not only that, but it also kind of sounds like Delta gave, offered and promised, directly or indirectly, compensation, gratuity or reward to Gibbons with the intent to influence him with respect to an act, decision or vote. At the very least, you have to admit it seems like Gibbons may have implicitly asked for and received compensation, gratuity or reward upon an agreement or understanding that his vote, opinion or action upon a matter then pending would be influenced thereby. Don’t you think?

• And finally today, yes, that was us at Various Things & Stuff on the TV at 11:30 p.m. Saturday and 5 p.m. Sunday. It’s a new weekly political talk show on KTNV Channel 13 that we’re co-hosting with Heidi Harris, of famed KXNT-AM 840 talk-radio duo Alan Stock and Heidi Harris.

It’s a brand-new venture, and we’ve not done too much TV before, save for our appearances on Nevada Week in Review with Mitch Fox. So, don’t be too harsh in your judgments while we get the program off the ground. We’ve already gotten tons of unsolicited advice, some good, some bad, much of which we plan to use. But the whole concept of doing a show with a paper bag on our head, well, we just can’t go there. So, be forwarned: If you tunes in, you takes your chances. Don’t eat for at least a half-hour beforehand.

You know how in James Bond movies, there’s an evil villain trying to take over the world? And how in 1999’s Tomorrow Never Dies the villain was media mogul Elliot Carver, (Jonathan Price)?

Readers, meet the real-life Elliot Carver, MediaNews CEO William Dean Singleton. Like his cinematic counterpart, Singleton has bought up a lot of media, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area. Thanks to the recent sale of the Knight Ridder newspaper chain to the McClatchy chain, Singleton was able to pick up a few more papers, including the venerable San Jose Mercury News, the Contra Costa Times and the Monterey Press-Herald. All told, MediaNews owns 17 papers in and around San Francisco, including the San Francisco Chronicle Oakland Tribune. (UPDATE: The San Francisco Chronicle is owned by Hearst Corp.)

And that’s just not right, according to one advertiser, developer Clinton Reilly, who filed an anti-trust lawsuit at the tail end of last week.

Why do we in Las Vegas care about this? Good question, readers. It’s not just our obsession with all things California. It’s because our very own corporate overlords, the Stephens Media Group, are partners with a 26 percent interest in most of MediaNews’ California holdings, thanks to something called the California Newspaper Partnership. And that means Stephens, which owns CityLife and this blog, is a co-defendant with Singleton in the lawsuit.

And it’s a doozy. Consider these quotes, featured in the Las Vegas Sun on Saturday (the Stephens-owned Review-Journal somehow only found room for a brief):