It’s Monday, and we’re way behind over here. But we’ve got some Quick Hits for you anyway! Here we go!

• About time. Don’t get us wrong: We’re glad District Attorney David Roger is moving to oust embattled Recorder Frances Deane from office before her term expires in November. As Roger says, “It doesn’t make sense to keep paying her salary when it’s pretty clear she has committed some serious criminal acts.”

Our question is: What took you so long?

It’s been obvious — to everybody except Justice of the Peace Karen Bennett-Haron, who has yet to rule on whether Deane should be bound over for trial on charges she sold public records to shady businessmen — that Deane has committed some serious criminal acts. Her preliminary hearing was in June, for God’s sake.

Why wait until now to evict her? Why not do it when the allegations were first brought to light?

Partly, it may be explained by the fact that Deane hasn’t been around the office much, taking a paid “medical leave” for weeks and leaving her duties in the care of the assistant recorder.

But the fact remains, this move is long overdue, as is Bennett-Haron’s decision. How ironic will it be if a judge removes Deane from office before Bennett-Haron gets around to deciding whether there’s enough evidence to even have a trial?

• That’s debatable. So U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons wants to have a trio of debates, including one in Elko? We hope that state Sen. Dina Titus packs her .32-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver for that one. Not only will it endear her to locals, but it just might come in handy after Gibbons tars her as “a Kennedy liberal.” Up in Elko, them’s fighting words!

• Quotable: “He’s a 10-year congressman who was shunned for every committee position he ever pursued. His peers in the House have spoken volumes in the last few years. The speaker of the House and the leadership have spoken, and Nevada should listen.” — Political consultant Billy Vassiliadis on Gibbons.

Well, not every position, Billy. He is, after all, chairman of the Energy and Mineral Resources subcommittee of the Resources Committee. Remember that bill that would have let big mining companies buy up the land surrounding old mining claims and put condos on them? That was an Energy and Mineral Resources special.

Oh, wait. That bill didn’t pass. OK, never mind.

• Don’t forget! Candidates for office including governor and Congress will appear at a candidate’s forum from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. tonight at the Flamingo Library Theater, 1401 E. Flamingo Road. The forum is sponsored by Congregation Ner Tamid, and is guest hosted by my colleague Jon Ralston.

In our recent profile of U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, we at Various Things & Stuff quoted current and former Senate staffers calling Review-Journal columnist Jane Ann Morrison a “Reid-hater.”

And, as if to prove those staffers correct, Morrison penned a column this weekend giving lots of ink to a prominent member of Reid’s faith, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In a letter to Reid, former Mormon Bishop James Howard upbraided Reid for failing to vote for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay marriage.

Morrison quoted Howard thus: “You chose your party’s agenda over Nevadans’, over your Prophets’ wishes, and defied God in the process. … You have sold out for power and position. Whining about how offended you are that your ‘Brethren’ are not supportive of you anymore is not becoming of a leader of such high position. Justifying your weak stance in direct opposition to your Church’s position is lame. You fear your party more than God.

“But having sold out your church, your state and possibly your soul for political power, I will have a hard time supporting you or voting for you in the future, should you attempt to hold on to your seat. Your soul is vacant, and you have lost your moral compass.”

Now, to be fair, Morrison did quote from a Reid letter and floor speech defending his stance — saying the amendment was a Republican move to distract from the party’s failures elsewhere, and that the issue belonged with the states. Reid supported a gay-marriage ban in Nevada’s constitution.

And, to be even more fair, this is a legitimate subject for commentary. But Morrison missed the clear and obvious opportunity to note that Howard is … well, wrong. And Reid is clearly in the right.

Any time that anyone — whether they speak with the authority of a church or not, and Howard acknowledged he was speaking only for himself — tries to use religion to force a person into a political stance, the wall between church and state has been breached. And anytime that happens, it’s incumbent upon people of goodwill to stand against it.

The state of Reid’s immortal soul is between him and God. But his duties and obligations to his party, his Nevada constituents and his nation are between him and the people. And Reid was absolutely right to oppose the illegitimate Republican push for a gay marriage ban, even if some in his church think less of him for it. Those are not the people to whom Reid answers in his secular job. He swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution, not the church.

Anybody should be able to see that. Unless, of course, they hate Reid to begin with.

What’s that? You want more post-primary Quick Hits? Gosh, you people are insatiable! Well, all right then. Here we go:

• Today’s political pop quiz: How many people sit on the Las Vegas City Council? (Answer is at the bottom.)

• We’d temporarily forgotten that awful letter signed by five Democratic party luminaries back in October that was published on the state Democratic Party’s website.

You remember the non-endorsement endorsement of Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson signed by U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, former U.S. Sen. Richard Bryan, former Gov. Bob Miller, former Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa and former Assembly Speaker Joe Dini, don’t you? It specifically set out to undermine one of state Sen. Dina Titus’ key campaign theme, which was that Gibson wasn’t a real Democrat.

Here’s a few quick quotes from that missive:

“Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson and State Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus have been powerful voices on the issues Nevadans most deeply care about. Both are good Democrats. But they are also great leaders whose accomplishments, dedication and values would serve us well in the governor’s mansion. …

“Elections, especially Nevada elections, can be hard fought and spirited affairs. We believe a competitive primary will strengthen our eventual nominee. Nevada Democrats are a broad and inclusive party. While our two Democratic candidates may rightfully differentiate themselves from each other on issues, we believe that both share the same core values. …

“Let’s have a good, positive primary contest and emerge as united next fall, ready to offer Nevadans the best choice for the future of our state.”

To her credit, Titus didn’t fall in line with the program intended by the author of the letter, who is believed to be its first signer, Reid. She waged a tough, hard primary fight, based on the notion that she and Gibson didn’t share the same core values, that she and Gibson weren’t both good Democrats and that standing up for her values was more important than having a “good, positive primary contest.”

The letter, intended to silence Titus and squelch democracy, did just the opposite. And in so doing, it pointed out that officially neutral Reid’s preferred pick — Gibson — should be added to the “not such a good idea” list of other Reid-backed candidates, including Dario Herrera, who lost to U.S. Rep. Jon Porter in 2002, Erin Kenny, who lost to Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt that same year, and Andreas Ramirez, who lost to North Las Vegas Mayor Mike Montandon in 2005.

• So, why the history lesson, you ask? We were reminded after reading quotes from Gibson. Although his campaign pledged to back Titus if she won, Gibson himself balked on election night.

“I’ll never feel good about the negative attacks. What I’d rather do before I commit is wait until I’ve had a chance to sit down and talk to her,” Gibson said.

Now, would those be the negative attacks Gibson launched against Titus that are plaguing the mayor’s conscience? Or her broadsides against him?

Titus certainly doesn’t need advice from us, but one of the great things about our job is that we get to offer it for free: Focus on the general, and move forward. There are Gibson supporters who will never, ever support Titus for governor, no matter what Gibson says or does. You can’t win over those folks.

Oh, what, you don’t believe us? Check out these quotes, gathered by a Las Vegas Sun reporter at Gibson HQ on election night:

– “I don’t think so,” (in response to Titus’ plea for party unity.

– “No way,” (Id.)

– “I think the party has been taken over by the left a little bit. I liked it better before when it was God, guns and labor. … [Titus is] just a little bit too liberal for me.” — Mark Engel.

– “She’s so annoying,” (during Titus’ victory speech)

• And, bringing things full circle, we have Reid and U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, who wisely didn’t sign that infamous letter, pleading for unity once again.

“It was a hard-fought campaign by two candidates who cared deeply about our state’s future. Our party is proudly united behind Dina and our Democratic ticket. … We are confident that Nevada voters will embrace her vision for Nevada and elect her as our new governor.” (Even if, the Reid-Berkley letter didn’t say, one of us didn’t.)

• One more? Here’s Bryan — whom we love, by the way, like the rest of Nevada — on Titus: “She has worked tirelessly since the last session. While others were philosophizing or strategizing over a beer at Adele’s, she was working every night. She’s worked tirelessly. A year and a half ago, I think she was underestimated.”

Indeed, she was, senator. By quite a few people.

• OK, enough post-primary told-you-so. It’s time for the Republicans to get some of our special brand of love, too!

– “I know it’s going to take some healing, but I want to reach out to my opponents and work towards that healing.” — U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons, also urging party unity. (”When Gibbons gets that feeling, he totally needs some political healing.”)

No, in answer to your question, we’re not particularly proud of ourselves for that one.

– “I don’t think we lost. We were outspent four to one, outstaffed six to one. We had less of everything as we set out … to make our government listen to the people of Nevada. I think we did that.” — state Sen. Bob Beers, redefining victory.

Now, we like Beers. Really we do. But in America, in a democracy, we define “winning” an election as “gathering the most votes.” It’s not decided based on spending, or staffing, or sending messages. It’s decided on votes. (Well, except for the 2000 presidential election, but that’s a sad footnote to history.)

– “I imagine he’s learned some valuable lessons.” — Beers, on Gibbons. (Yes, and Lesson No. 1 is, never, ever debate Bob Beers on anything ever again.)

– “TASC passage is more important than who’s governor. It will be in the constitution to safeguard it against the whimsical expansion of state government.” — Beers, on his actual victory.

– “If somebody uses underhanded ways to win a campaign, and wins it without integrity, what does it mean?” — Barbara Lee Woollen, marveling at her loss to state Treasurer Brian Krolicki in the lieutenant governor’s race.

Yes, let’s see. What does it mean? Well, we guess it means that Krolicki is the Republican nominee! That’s it! That’s what it means!

• And a sheriff’s quote:

– “If Doug Gillespie puts a commercial on television, I’ll put two. If he puts an ad in the paper, I’ll put two.” — Businessman Jerry Airola, pledging to outspend Metro Police Undersheriff Doug Gillespie in the general election.

Oh, and of course, he didn’t add, “If he puts one of ours in the hospital, we’ll put one of his in the morgue. That’s the Chicago way!” (Can anybody name the movie?)

• And finally, the answer to the political pop quiz: The Las Vegas City Council has seven members: Mayor Oscar Goodman and six council members, elected from districts called “wards.” It formerly had five members, but voters decided to expand it in 1999.

We’ve done the big race, now it’s time to bat some cleanup in post-primary Quick Hits!

• Security breach? What was up with Metro Police showing up at state Sen. Dina Titus’ campaign headquarters during her victory party last night? KTNV Channel 13 (where we were on hand to provide a little color commentary) reported a threat had been phoned in, and Titus was seen on camera being escorted by university Regent Steve Sisolak.

Sisolak, a bodyguard? We can’t buy that. How about Stavros Anthony? At least the Metro Police captain can carry a gun. Oh, wait, that’s right. Titus doesn’t need a bodyguard at all, since she herself owns a .32-caliber Smith & Wesson snubnose revolver.

Watch out, threat makers. Dirty Dina shoots to kill. Or so we hear from campaign staffers spotted walking into Gibson headquarters.

• Debt retirement. Now that several candidates have been eliminated in the primary, it looks like they owe some folks some money.

See, maximum donations in Nevada politics are $5,000 per election (the primary and the general count as separate elections). But donors pony up $10,000, betting that their candidate makes it into the general election, too.

If you don’t make it to the general, you’ve got to repay the extra $5,000, lest you be in violation of campaign finance laws.

Something tells us we’ll be hearing about debt retirement parties very soon. A lot of them.

• Las Vegas, brought to its knees by a lack of water? Say it isn’t so? (Actually, the Las Vegas Sun quotes water czar Pat Mulroy saying it is so in today’s edition.)

• And finally today, we’ve gotten to wondering if Republican Failure King™ George Harris has been taking yoga classes. In an e-mail missive today, Harris switches sides to embrace U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons’ candidacy faster than Erin Kenny hitting her knees in Mike Galardi’s office.

For weeks, Harris has been promoting the candidacy of state Sen., Bob Beers in his advertising vehicle Liberty Watch: The Magazine. (In fact, Harris sent out an election-day link to a video e-mail of Beers making a final pitch for votes.) Harris and his magazine have also been bashing Gibbons, whose campaign manager Robert Uithoven, smelling a hit piece, refused to allow Gibbons to submit to questions from Liberty Watch Editor Mike Zigler. (Full disclosure: Zigler is a former news editor at CityLife.)

It’s that kind of intellectual flexibility that allows Harris to explain what’s obviously a pay-to-play scheme thusly: “First, I’ve never clamed to be a journalist, and of course I will promote any like-minded person out there. I’m also going to earn money doing it. After all, I’m a businessman.

“[Political columnist Jon] Ralston never points how he pimps out his Ralston Report, which is an insiders look into how a liberal journalist views politics in Nevada. But Ralston is right. I’ll write a ‘True’ favorable story about any Republican candidate and I’ll ask for their help to pay the postage into the district they are running in because Republicans will never ever have the truth told about them by the liberal media.”

We’ve tried for several days to get Zigler to tell us whether or not Liberty Watch accepts money for favorable coverage, but he’s refused to return our e-mails. Today’s admission from Harris, while not quite a full confession, is a tacit acknowledgment that the magazine is unconcerned with truth (even Harris puts the word in quotes!) and perfectly willing to “promote” people, rather than honestly profile them. (Click here for a recent example.)

One thing Harris said is true, however. He is in no way a journalist, nor is anyone whose name appears in his magazine. If he were one, he’d know to identify advertising content with a label that let readers know what they’re reading isn’t honest or even fair. It’s just ad copy, and not very good ad copy at that.

If the Democrats were doctrinaire, the Republicans were pragmatic on Tuesday, nominating U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons by a decisive, 19-point margin. They rejected state Sen. Bob Beers, author of the Tax and Spending Control initiative, even while (according to polls) they embrace the initiative itself. (Gibbons pulled 47.8 percent to Beers’ 28.8 percent.)

That’s nothing new in Nevada politics: Richard Ziser, now head of Nevada Concerned Citizens, shepherded the anti-gay marriage Question 2 initiative to victory, but when he ran for U.S. Senate himself in 2004, he lost to “none of these candidates” in several rural counties.

Republican voters also rejected Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt’s candidacy (she got only 17.7 percent of the vote). To be fair, however, no Republican voter even knew what Hunt’s campaign was about, save for being a close working partner with Gov. Kenny Guinn on everything except for the gross receipts tax. Seriously, we have never seen anybody talk more while saying nothing than we did watching Hunt.

But let’s remember something: Beers still wins. First, he’ll be back in the state Senate, serving as either chairman or vice-chairman of the Finance Committee. That puts him in a key role to exert influence on spending and taxes. Second, TASC will likely appear on the November ballot. If it’s approved, Beers true goal — saving Nevada from a government that grows faster than “we the people” — will be accomplished, even if Beers himself will come to the governor’s mansion only as a visitor.

Besides, Beers is relatively young (and good looking, too!) and a maverick. Should state Sen. Dina Titus win in November, or even if Gibbons takes the job, Beers can run again in four years. With better funding, it’s not inconceivable that he could have done much better against the well-funded Gibbons machine.

And that brings us to the Democrats.

If there was such a thing as the “Jim Gibson machine,” it was an Edsel, beloved by its designers, but rejected by the public. Despite spending a whole heck of a lot of money, Gibson managed but a paltry 35.6 percent, which cannot be explained simply by his taciturn personality. Titus took a commanding 53 percent of the vote, a margin of about 17 points.

There’s a name for that: Landslide.

In part, Gibson’s loss can be explained by Titus’ aggressive posture. She attacked the Henderson mayor early on, but before she uttered a single word, Gibson badly flubbed a relatively easy abortion question posed by my colleague Jon Ralston on his television show Face to Face. Gibson spent the rest of the campaign explaining himself, and Titus made sure he had no shortage of subjects to explain himself on, ranging from the monorail to Nevada Power to pay-to-play politics to personal ethics. At times, it seemed, Gibson seemed to wonder how much of that shit he had to put up with.

None, anymore, mayor.

A message has clearly been sent, and that message is this: Democrats prefer Democrats to vote for in Democratic primary elections. They want a fighter, and Titus gave them one. They want somebody who will advocate their agenda, and, while Gibson boasted a host of progressive issues, he seemed to be too conciliatory for the party faithful.

It occurs that this was easily foreseen, even and perhaps especially by those fond of marveling at how “electable” Gibson was, should he make the general election. Gibson would have kept the Democrats who would never vote for Gibbons anyway, while cutting into Gibbons’ base. Who are Republicans. But it’s worth asking if a Democrat appeals so strongly to Republicans, how good of a Democrat can he really be?

The thought was brought full-circle by the most unintentionally funny quote of the night, from Titus. Asked at her victory party how she’ll shift her campaign strategy from dealing with Jim Gibson to dealing with Jim Gibbons, Titus said she wouldn’t be making many changes at all.

One size fits all? Or fits all Republicans?

Well, folks, it’s the Big Day! Even as you read this, people are going to the polls all around the valley to participate in democracy. (Alas, we saw only two other voters when we showed up at our polling place in Henderson this morning.)

Remember, people: Vote! It annoys the Review-Journal!

Now, let’s do a quick round-up of last-minute election-related items for your reading pleasure.

• “If you’re not on TV, you’re nobody!” At least that’s how we think the quote from the lovely Nicole Kidman went in that one movie, To Die For. To that end, we’ve got just a few places you might watch election results tonight:

– On KLAS Channel 8, the news team and my colleague Jon Ralston will be analyzing election returns, starting at 10 p.m. We’re betting you’ll see an appearance from CityLife columnist George “Knappster” Knapp, who works part-time as an investigative reporter at the station to supplement his fabulous CityLife paycheck.

– On KLVX Channel 10, Nevada Week in Review host Mitch Fox will team up with KVVU anchor John Huck for election coverage starting at 7:30 p.m., running until 10 p.m. Review-Journal Editor Tom Mitchell will join them. (We’ve got the under on five minutes before Mitchell uses the phrase “Jeffersonian democracy.”)

– And, of course, for the most insightful, incisive and interesting political commentary of the evening — as well as the potential for a lot more alliteration — you simply must tune to KTNV Channel 13, where we will grace the airwaves (covered for your protection, as always, in a thick coat of man makeup) with real-life professional news anchor Cathy Ray and the rest of the Channel 13 team. We’re so excited, we might even put on a tie!

• Better to be feared than loved? The Jim Gibson campaign e-mailed a voice mail today from state Sen. Dina Titus that appears to angrily confront a person who works for Democratic lieutenant governor candidate Bob Unger for allegedly helping with Gibson’s get-out-the-vote efforts. (The person was apparently innocent; she just went to the Gibson headquarters to drop something off, the Gibson campaign said.)

Titus, in an angry voice, tells the staffer “…I’ll be speaking to Bob about this, and you can be assured that I am not happy. So, it’s a bad choice that you have made.” Ouch, baby. Very ouch.

The Gibson campaign says that Titus “personally threatened” the staffer, we assume with the implication that she would urge Unger to fire her. The e-mail also (unwisely, we think) refers to Titus as “unstable,” clearly a libelous charge, even in a political campaign.

The fact is, Titus isn’t unstable at all: She’s continuing to play a very serious game of hardball politics. It started at the 2005 session, when lobbyists were afraid even to be seen in the presence of Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins for fear their loyalties to Titus would be questioned. (The reverse was also true, we understand.)

It’s not a very pretty picture, we admit, and if it really is a misunderstanding, it’s even worse. Titus, according to polls, has the election wrapped up. She can afford to be a little magnanimous, and not so paranoid about who may or may not be helping her opponent in the closing hours of the campaign.

• Beers’ makes last-minute push. We’ve got to say, we really do like state Sen. Bob Beers’ final weekend ad campaign. The simple ads feature Beers sitting on a couch, answering questions. They’re a little jarring in the sense that there’s no introduction; Beers just appears on the screen and starts talking. But he’s a good-looking guy, so it’s OK.

We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: Beers is the most Republican best choice for a genuine Republican in the race. U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons has taken a few positions inconsistent with Republican philosophy (not that we mind that at all, of course) and Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt became the queen of cliché during this campaign. (Moreover, we’re sore at her for dodging repeated interview requests for our show on KTNV Channel 13, Political Insiders. Bad! That’s a bad lieutenant governor! Our show could have put you over the edge!)

But one thing about Beers has always concerned us: His association with political failuremeister George Harris. Beers is an investor in Liberty Media, which puts out the advertorial magazine Liberty Watch. And today, subscribers (or victims) to Harris’ e-mail list got a link to a last-minute Beers video, urging them to vote for the senator.

The video was good; Beers message and wry humor were intact. But why the need to rely on Harris? Beers has shown some tech savvy during the race, even airing a commercial on the Internet. He doesn’t need the odious peddler of conservative hagiography to help him. In fact, ties to Harris are a real drain on Beers’ credibility. Beers ought to distance himself from Harris at the earliest opportunity, win or lose today.

Mayor Oscar Goodman, contrasting himself to a radio disc jockey who got a citation for feeding homeless people, actually said this: “I’m constantly out in the community trying to make it a better place — not as a person who loves publicity, but as a person who loves Las Vegas.”

Right.

But here’s the thing: Goodman doesn’t love Las Vegas enough to, say, pay the salaries of the city video crew that once taped a giant martini party the mayor had and worked overtime to produce a video news release mailed out the next day. (They do so on orders of his ersatz “chief of staff” Stephanie Boixo, who is now the mayor’s daughter-in-law.) He doesn’t love Las Vegas enough to defray the taxpayer expense in producing mayoral bobblehead dolls. He doesn’t love Las Vegas enough to refrain from endorsing gin, photographing Playboy models or go places unescorted by taxpayer-financed showgirls and Elvis impersonators.

Goodman, saying he doesn’t love publicity? That’s absurd!

C’mon, mayor. Admit it. You love the limelight. You eat it up. It’s your bag, baby. And people love you for it, along with your much-ballyhooed candor. If you’re going to start going around telling people you don’t love publicity, you may as well give up drinking, showgirls, gambling and using your position in government to try to help your sons. Those are the things that make you who you are!

Goodman, eschewing publicity. Next thing you’ll tell us, Bob Beers wants to raise taxes with the support of the Review-Journal’s editorial page, Chuck Muth will start dating Francis Allen and President George W. Bush and Ann Coulter will go on live TV to admit, and apologize for, all their mistakes! Please!

We’re just not that gullible.

Everybody makes mistakes, even us at Various Things & Stuff. We don’t want to rub it in (too much) but a couple of recent errors caught our eye.

• First, the Las Vegas Sun’s new Washington, D.C. reporter Lisa Mascaro shouldn’t be judged too harshly for her Aug. 9 piece, in which she reported that U.S. Sen. Harry Reid was “a longtime abortion-rights supporter.”

Most people in Nevada, we’re convinced, think that Reid is pro-choice, which he’s not. Reid is far less liberal than people actually think, but through years of consummate political skill, he has political camouflage that makes the Predator aliens of movie fame look naked.

Then again, there was a wee bit of a clue for Mascaro in that she was writing about Reid ’s actions in regard to that bill by U.S. Sen. John Ensign that would prohibit taking a teenager across state lines in order to get an abortion so as to avoid parental consent laws. If Reid really was pro-choice, why would he have voted in favor of Ensign’s bill?

But then again, after the bill passed, Reid allowed his lieutenant, U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., to put a hold on it. Presto! The pro-life Reid looks pro-choice, on paper at least. The paper set the record straight on Aug. 11.

• We also enjoyed the bevy of corrections in Saturday’sReview-Journal, but none more than the one for Ken White’s story about ratings for local television programs.

In an apparent haste to tar Face to Face with Jon Ralston, White mistakenly said the show — which appears on Las Vegas ONE (Cox Communications Channel 19) — airs first at 11 a.m., with a mere 130 viewers. In fact, the R-J admitted, the show first airs at 5:30 p.m., and has 156 viewers, according to Nielsen research.

Not a big difference, to be sure, but still an indication that White hadn’t actually watched the program enough to write about it.

Then again, we should cut him a little slack, too. It’s much harder writing original copy rather than, say, cut-and-pasting text out of Clark County news releases. (See sixth item.)

With U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman being lionized by the likes of Vice President Dick Cheney, it’s clear the voters of Connecticut made the right call in rejecting him last week. Our corporate overlord Sherm Frederick even got into the act, saying it’s hard out there for a conservative Democrat, and comparing Lieberman to our own Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson.

We totally agree, Corporate Overlord. Jim Gibson is a hell of a lot like Lieberman. But that’s not a good thing!

Before we go on, let’s dispense with this nonsense of party leaders like Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, steering the party to the left in the Lieberman race. Major figures in the Democratic Party, including former President Bill Clinton, U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (hardly a conservative) and former U.S. Sen. Max Cleland all turned out to campaign hard for Lieberman. And major figures like our own U.S. Sen. Harry Reid and U.S. Sen. John Kerry didn’t endorse Lieberman’s antiwar challenger Ned Lamont until after Lieberman had lost.

And, at this point, it’s worth noting something: Lieberman is a whiney bitch who would do pretty much anything to hold on to his seat. It could be the only way he gets anybody to listen to him.

Remember six years ago, when Lieberman was running for vice president with Al Gore? Instead of giving up his Connecticut Senate seat and committing fully to the presidential race, Lieberman also campaigned for re-election in Connecticut. He lost the big race, but won his senatorial consolation prize, and left Democrats wondering how committed he was to beating George W. Bush in the first place.

(Ironically enough, we think he did beat Bush. But instead of challenging the election results, he simply rolled over.)

Now, six years later, Lieberman is also doing a two-step, running as a Democrat, but, when polls showed he was trailing Lamont because of his pro-war, pro-Bush stances, he made arrangements to run as an “independent Democrat” in the November general election. Sure enough, he lost again, but is planning a rear-guard action to try to hold on to his precious seat.

He claims noble aspirations, saving his party and the Senate from partisanship. But we believe the motive is more base: Winning at all costs.

Our evidence? First, Lieberman says nothing when his strange-bedfellow allies say things like this in his defense:

“The thing that’s partly disturbing about it is the fact that, [from] the standpoint of our adversaries, if you will, in this conflict, and the al-Qaida types, they clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete our task.” — Vice President Dick Cheney

“It’s a defining moment for the Democratic Party whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party they’re going to come after you.” — White House press secretary Tony Snow

Lieberman was “a voice of support for Israel” who had been “silenced by the Democratic Party.” — From a newspaper ad taken out by the Republican Jewish Coalition. (Yes, we too are surprised that there is such a thing.)

Cheney and Snow are beyond shame, but the Republican Jewish Coalition should feel a good bit of it after that ad. Anti-Semitism is real, as Mel Gibson has reminded us. But Lieberman’s defeat didn’t have a damn thing to do with his race, and they know it. That makes them charlatans.

But it’s little wonder that Lieberman says nothing. Because after the latest anti-terror plot was foiled by authorities in Pakistan and Great Britain, here’s what Lieberman himself said: The anti-war views of Ned Lamont would “be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to below up these planes in this plot hatched in England.”

With that remark, Lieberman graduates from whiney bitch to something far, far worse: A political campaigner in the mold of Karl Rove, willing to say or do anything to gain office. Can there be a greater reason to deny it to him?

We know some of you have already gone to the polls, but for you die-hard traditionalists who wait until Election Day, we’ve got some new info. Las Vegas Night Beat has weighed in with primary election endorsements from the perspective of the gay community, and we’ve got them for you.

Not many surprises, to be sure, as many of the endorsed candidates are Democrats who support gay rights. Jack Carter gets the nod for U.S. Senate, incumbent Shelley Berkley is endorsed for another term in the House and newcomer Tessa Hafen is supported for the 3rd Congressional District. Up north, in an exception to the rule, Night Beat supports Secretary of State Dean Heller to replace U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons in Congress.

Speaking of Gibbons, the magazine supports his rival, state Sen. Dina Titus for governor. Democrat Bob Unger gets the nod for lieutenant governor, while gubernatorial son Ross Miller is supported for secretary of state. For treasurer, Geoffrey VanderPal gets the nod.

In other top primary races, Night Beat supports < b>Chris Giunchigliani for Clark County Commission; Frank Cremen for district attorney; Michael Douglas for state Supreme Court Seat F; Nancy Becker for state Supreme Court Seat G; and either Laurie Bisch or Bill Conger for Clark County sheriff. (In another dual endorsement, the publication gives its backing to both Richard “Tick” Segerblom and Ben Contine in Assembly District 9.

Perhaps most helpful to the gay community -— although it should be of concern to people of good will everywhere in Las Vegas — is the magazine’s notation of candidates who signed the anti-gay protection of marriage pledge. Because we agree that intolerance should be a disqualifying factor for those who hold public office — especially judicial offices — we reprint that roster of shame here, along with the offices for which those candidates are running. Consider it a public service.

• Sharron Angle (Congressional Dist. 2)

• Lonnie Hammargren (lieutenant governor)

• Brian Krolicki (lieutenant governor)

• The late Kathy Augustine (controller)

• Sandra Tiffany (state Senate Dist. 5)

• Barbara Cegavske (state Senate Dist. 8 )

• Tim Cory (state Senate Dist. 8 )

• Francis Allen (Assembly Dist. 4)

• David Adams (Assembly Dist. 11)

• Bob McCleary (Assembly Dist. 11)

• Susan Brager (Clark County Commission, Dist. F)

• David Roger (Clark County district attorney)

• Bob Spencer (Clark County recorder)

• Kevin Child (Clark County recorder)

• Jim Edwards (Clark County recorder)

• Merle Berman (Clark County public administrator)

• Louis Toomin (Clark County public administrator)

• Thomas Christensen (state Supreme Court, Seat G)

• Stavros Anthony (board of regents)

• Mitchell Tracy (Clark County school board, Dist. F)

• Abbi Silver (Las Vegas Justice of the Peace, Dept. 10)

We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: There’s plenty of information out there for you to decide who best represents your views. Now gather that information, and head to the polls, either now in early voting or on election day, next Tuesday, Aug. 15.