WARNING: The following item contains a link to photographs that may be inappropriate for underage web surfers. But let’s be honest: The kids already know how to find all of this stuff. But the Various Things & Stuff legal department makes us put a disclaimer on here. So, proceed with caution, or wild abandon, as the case may be, into today’s set of Quick Hits!

What? Miss Nevada, Katie Rees, has been dethroned because of racy pictures that were taken five years ago! What the hell is happening to America? And how the hell can Miss USA part-owner Donald Trump give a pass to Miss USA Tara Conner’s antics but support the dethroning of Miss Nevada USA? It just makes no sense!

Let’s be honest here, people. Being a celebrity these days means drinking, flirting, carousing and occasionally being photographed flashing yourself or simulating sex acts on random patrons of the bar in which you happen to be drinking at any given time, followed by a tearful apology and a stay in rehab. Poor Katie Rees was just following the script! And now The Donald wants to discard her like his first two wives? Please!

And c’mon, folks. This is Vegas. By our community standards, this isn’t even considered racy! In fact, we understand this is how many of the young people in the clubs say hello these days.

Anyway, we think Katie Rees should get another chance just like Conner did. This young woman is obviously very talented, and has a future in film. Yes, the film may be grainy and shot with a night-vision camera, but still. So, in the spirit of the holidays, let’s all give her a break, OK?

» Speaking of Las Vegas community standards, you can read all about how our bars and restaurants will now be as smoke free as New York City’s, in the Review-Journal and the Las Vegas Sun.

We certainly don’t like, and don’t agree, with District Court Judge Douglas Herndon’s ruling on the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act. But we do understand it, and we don’t think he abused his discretion in ruling the way he did. Herndon was no doubt influenced by the fact that 54 percent of Nevada voters approved the act on Nov. 7, and he didn’t want to set aside the obvious will of the voters.

The people have spoken. The bastards.

» Looking for some holiday entertainment? There’s nothing finer than Political Insiders, the show we host on KTNV Channel 13. This week’s guest is U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, who in January will rise to become Nevada’s senior member of Congress. We talk about the war on Christmas, and all the Christmas cheer she’ll bring our way as a member of the House Ways & Means Committee. The show airs 11:30 p.m. Saturday and repeats at 5 p.m. Sunday.

» And finally today, a program note: We at Various Things & Stuff will be winging our way west for the Christmas holiday, spending a glorious week in our beautiful home state of California. The blog will return in early January, with all new postings. Until then, have a merry Christmas and a happy new year. See you in 2007!

As we understand it, District Court Judge Douglas Herndon’s ruling on the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act only grants a preliminary injunction against enforcement with respect to the criminal penalties for smoking violations. The act itself will be allowed to go into effect, but as a civil construct, not a criminal one. Smokers who break the law can be fined by a local health district, but not jailed.

In other words, a ban on smoking in bars that serve food, as well as convenience stores, grocery stores, restaurants, and pretty much every other place that doesn’t have an unrestricted gaming license, will go into effect as scheduled.

The matter will probably still be appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court, but we frankly don’t hold out much hope that the justices will reverse what they will see as the will of the people. (The act, which appeared on the Nov. 7 ballot as Question 5, got 54 percent of the vote.)

We opposed the act, and supported the lawsuit against it, for reasons that regular readers know all too well. And while lawyers for taverns and slot route operators made good points that the law was vague and applied unfairly, at the heart of our opposition was this: Those who wish to avoid smoking need only avoid places where people smoke. Alas, the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association and other groups disagreed. They apparently feel just fine with regulating everybody’s environment, and did just that.

Mark our words, readers: The battle doesn’t end here. Under the act, bars that don’t serve food, casino gaming floors, tobacco retail stores and (we think) hotel and motel rooms are exempt from the ban. But the smoke banners won’t allow that for long. They’ve already declared they want a smoke-free Nevada, and they’ll keep pushing for laws that make it so.

Have no doubt that Nevada has lost something with this enactment. Whether that bothers the majority enforcing its will upon the personal habits of the minority is irrelevant. It’s a loss nonetheless.

Oh, snap! Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman must have realized that the year was coming to a close, and that his chances of winning the coveted Irony Prize were not yet sewn up. So he jumped in with a last-minute, at-the-buzzer quote that’s sure to capture the title!

How else to describe this remark, contained in a city news release about the city putting off a decision to engage in a fruitless legal fight to stop airplanes from making the so-called "right turn" over the city. "This is not an issue of rich and poor," Goodman is quoted as saying in the release. "These planes will be coming right over the core of the city and the important issue is public safety. We also must be prudent in the way we are stewards of the public’s dollars."

The emphasis is ours. The irony is his.

The mayor who has said his job is "like playing Monopoly with other people’s money" now claims we need to be prudent in being stewards of the public’s dollars? The man who has given away tax breaks to for-profit businesses wants to be prudent in spending public money? The man whose ex-"chief of staff" ordered a city video crew to work all night for on a video news release of Goodman partying at a downtown bar is suddenly frugal? The man who ordered (and then claimed he didn’t) thousands of dollars worth of videotapes of his own TV appearances, all charged to the city, has become a piker where tax dollars are concerned? The man who has spent taxpayer money on fucking bobblehead dolls of himself is holding forth on fiscal responsibility?!

Now that’s irony on a universal scale. Mayor Goodman, we’re confident that you have beaten out all competitors (including Vice President Dick Cheney, no small feat) for the 2006 Irony Prize. Congratulations.

» That’s two down for Team Gibbons.

First, the new administration has forced out George Togliatti, the ex-FBI agent who left casino security to join state government as Gov. Kenny Guinn’s director of the Department of Public Safety. The department oversees all state law-enforcement, from the Highway Patrol to the Investigations Division to the state fire marshal.

Gibbons spokesman Brent Boynton confirmed to the Review-Journal that Togliatti was told  by Gibbons’ people the new governor "wanted a change of direction at the Department of Public Safety." We don’t know why: Other than a high-profile sexual-harassment lawsuit at the Highway Patrol, Togliatti seemed to be doing a fairly good job as the state’s top cop.

But the more damaging departure is that of Donna Coleman, former president of the Las Vegas Children’s Advocacy Alliance, and late of Gibbons’ transition team on public safety. Coleman, who re-registered as a Republican and publicly supported Gibbons during what Review-Journal writer Molly Ball identified as his campaign’s one moment of policy utterance, said she felt she wasn’t really valued on the transition team.

No! Really? Color us shocked!

"I haven’t been contacted by anybody about anything since the election. People don’t know what they’re supposed to be doing with these transition teams," Coleman said.

Indeed. Let’s see what Boynton had to say about that.

"Jim Gibbons has always welcomed her input and he hopes to get input from her in the future," Boynton said in the R-J story. "Jim Gibbons remains committed to the input of these people [transition team members]. He knows he’s getting diverse opinions, and he believes that’s the best way to get input about the issues important to Nevadans, although not everybody is going to agree."

Can we at least agree to reduce the use of the word "input" to, say, just once per paragraph? Gibbons is getting so much input in that last quote, we’re going to start thinking he’s an emotionless cyborg, sent from the future to ensure that the Internet gains self-awareness and kills us all. Or at least to keep taxes in check.

Anyway, Coleman seems like a nice person with good intentions, so let us very gently suggest that she and other transition team members aren’t really supposed to play an active role in making policy. (Boynton has already confessed that publicly.) The whole thing is more or less for show.

Oh, and one final nugget unearthed by Ball: The transition teams now number 196. Why, just four more people and you can say you’ve got "hundreds" of "inputters"!

» How cynical can John Kitchen, owner of a Fremont Street check-cashing business, truly be? Kitchen had the gall to suggest that the city — which advocated the lawsuit-plagued Fremont Street Experience and the failing Neonopolis — wasn’t going to succeed in creating "Fremont East," Las Vegas’ answer to the Gaslamp District in San Diego?

Have a little faith, man! The third time’s the charm! Meanwhile, in order to get a true comparison going, we at Various Things & Stuff will begin immediately lobbying our corporate overlords to open a San Diego bureau, from which we can daily visit the Gaslamp and other parts of that seaside burg and report back about all the things Las Vegas will probably never have. What about it, corporate overlords?

» And finally today, the Clark County Commission authorized county Manager Virginia Valentine to negotiate higher pay for the director of aviation, an obvious bid to get current director Randy Walker to stay in his job. (Walker has announced he’s leaving his post at McCarran to take a job with Carter & Burgess, a firm that’s received millions in McCarran contracts over the years, and will be a prime player in the new Ivanpah airport near Primm.)

After saying that the average salary for directors of the four airports in the country that are busier than McCarran (Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles and Dallas) is $248,000, Valentine said she’d pitch a higher salary to Walker right after Christmas. Commissioners rushed to point out that the salary won’t come from tax dollars; instead, it will be paid by the enterprise fund at the airport that’s generated by airport concessions and airline fees.

Whew, that’s a relief! Thank goodness that no Las Vegas residents ever fly into or out of McCarran, or buy anything at the airport! Otherwise, we’d end up paying that salary, too!

Who’s tired of hearing about the fight against the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act? Well, a major milestone will be reached at 3 p.m. today, when District Court Judge Douglas Herndon rules on whether some tavern, bar, convenience store, grocery store and slot route owners deserve to get a preliminary injunction.

And while we’d never bet on what we think a judge or a jury will do in a legal case, we’re inclined to think that Herndon will grant that injunction today, saying the law is simply too vague to be enforced. An inevitable appeal to the state Supreme Court will follow, and God only knows what that panel will do.

But until then, we’ve got to have something to talk about, don’t we? So let’s do a few Quick Hits!

» Nevada Chief Deputy Attorney General Christine Gucrci-Nyhus was arguing in favor of keeping the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act intact Tuesday when she made a major error. "Seventy-six percent of Nevadans don’t smoke and have the right to enjoy a night out without being exposed to secondhand smoke," she said, according to the Review-Journal.

Wrong!

You have the right to freely speak your mind in America, and in Nevada. You have the right to keep and bear arms. You have the right to be secure in your person, papers and effects from unreasonable search and seizure. You have the right not to be forced to testify against yourself in court, and not to have your property taken by the government for a public use without just compensation (sort of). You have the right to a speedy trial if you’re charged with a crime.

You don’t have the right to enjoy an evening out without being exposed to secondhand smoke. That’s simply false, no matter how many people in the state of Nevada happen to agree with it. And while a layperson should know that, a trained lawyer (who has taken a class on constitutional law, and who is in the service of the people of the state of Nevada, and who has risen to a supervisory position) must know that.

Some may disagree, saying their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights) means they do have the right to not be exposed to secondhand smoke.

Very well: It’s cold and flu season. If we have the right to not be exposed to secondhand smoke because it’s unhealthy, do we not also have the right to quarantine sick people in their homes until they are no longer contagious? Don’t we have the right to go to Vons without encountering a person who might make us ill, even if all that person is doing is buying orange juice and Sudafed in order to feel better? According to the Guerci-Nyhus Doctrine, we sure do.

If the smoking ban is upheld, we at Various Things & Stuff will follow the law, and abstain from smoking anywhere it’s prohibited by law. But let’s not invent "rights" out of thin air to justify what this is really about: The thuggish use of the initiative process to force a minority to hew to the will of the majority, and another step in the gradual erosion of civilization.

» President George W. Bush lied again. It’s getting to be a regular occurrence.

Just before the Nov. 7 elections, Bush expressed the view that America is winning the war in Iraq. Now, anybody with access to a television or a newspaper knew that wasn’t true, but Bush said it and stood behind it anyway.

Surprise: He admitted Tuesday that we’re not winning, and suggested we need to send more troops to Iraq to do so.

It wasn’t the only reversal on the president’s part: Remember when U.S. Sen. John Kerry wanted to expand the military, and the administration balked? Well, now the administration wants to expand the military.

It reminds us of how the Bushies derided Democrats who wanted to move troops out of Iraq as weaklings who wanted to "cut and run," before unveiling a strategy to reduce troop levels in Iraq. Or the time that our own Jim Gibbons proposed creating a Department of Homeland Security, and the administration said no, only to reverse itself and embrace the idea later.

For a president who never served as a combat aviator in Vietnam, Bush is sure reliving the experience. Only he’s in the role of Lyndon Baines Johnson, who at least had the dignity, grace and courage to step down when he knew he’d failed.

» We knew this would happen; we just didn’t know it would happen so soon. But when Nevadans elected doctrinaire Republican Jim Gibbons as governor in November, we knew that eventually his reality-proof rhetoric would come into direct conflict with the real world, with bad results for Nevadans.

And here he hasn’t even been sworn in and it’s happening already!

"We are not going to increase taxes and fees to the people of the state of Nevada. That’s a campaign promise and I plan to stick to it," Gibbons said. He was talking about the recommendations of a task force assigned by outgoing Gov. Kenny Guinn to study how to pay for a $3.8 billion shortfall in the state’s road-building budget.

Instead of taxes, Gibbons said, he’d look at using state surplus money (a good idea), or perhaps toll roads (a bad idea). He even said he’d consider bonds, which is odd, since bonds are repaid with taxes. Why is it, we wonder, that Republicans don’t consider deficit spending to be a tax on future generations? We just don’t get that.

Anyway, our point is this: Gibbons’ campaign rhetoric is now in direct conflict with a vital need for the state, i.e. a usable transportation system. We are so far behind in road building that even $500 million is chump change when you’re talking about nearly $4 billion — with a "b" — in overdue projects. But Gibbons wants to keep his campaign promise, and as a result millions of people will sit in gridlock? In a city where about half of the casino customers drive in? Does this make sense to anybody but Gibbons?

We’ve long noticed the odd psychic break in the public that disassociates paying taxes (say, gas taxes) with the things those taxes pay for (say, roads). People want free-flowing freeways and surface streets, but they’re unwilling to pay to get them, which is pretty much the same as going to Vons and expecting to get a loaf of bread and some bananas without forking over the cash. Who would do that, save for a thief?

A true leader would make people see the connection, level with them and tell them that in order to keep tourists rolling in (and locals rolling along) we’re going to need to spend the money we have wisely, but also find new money. A true leader would make the people see that sacrifice for the common good is not the evil thing that it became in the Ronald Reagan era. A true leader would let people know you can’t govern with a bumper sticker; you can’t make sweeping promises that, in the end, hurt the people you’re supposed to be helping.

Now if only we could find a true leader…

UPDATE: We at Various Things & Stuff have learned that the hearing for the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act has been postponed until 9 a.m. Thursday. Looks like another night of suspense!

District Court Judge Douglas Herndon says he’ll render a decision in the lawsuit against the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act at 3 p.m. Wednesday. The ruling will come after a marathon hearing today in which state officials argued with a collection of tavern owners, slot route operators and grocery and convenience stores over the act, which bans indoor smoking in Nevada almost everywhere.

Whew! Being a lawyer is a lot harder than you think, even if, like us, you’re just a fake lawyer! Anyway, we still have some Quick Hits, and here they are:

» Buffy Martin Tarbox, the government relations director for the American Cancer Society, sure is surprised a lot. When she heard about the lawsuit against the smoke banning Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act, she said she was "dumbfounded." And in today’s Review-Journal, the news that the Nevada Resort Association had come out in favor of the smoke ban (from which NRA members are conveniently exempt), left Martin Tarbox "perplexed and shocked."

Look, we’ve read her comments about the smoking issue from the beginning, and so we’re fully prepared to believe she goes through life in a perpetual state of confusion. But still, might not the cancer people want to get somebody a bit more, oh, seasoned?

After all, who in Nevada is perplexed or shocked that the NRA wants special treatment under law that benefits its members and screws the competition? We’re dumbfounded that anybody would be. It perplexes us. And shocks us. Or whatever.

» Meanwhile, Nevada’s prisons prepare to ban indoor smoking. State corrections officers must be so, so pleased.

» Peter "Chris" Christoff, still an idiot. In case anybody was wondering.

» And finally today, U.S. Sen. John Ensign is advocating an "oil trust" modeled after the Alaska Permanent Fund, which pays Alaska residents a royalty for living in a frigid wilderness. (New Rule: If they have to pay you to live there, the place is fucked up. Apologies to Bill Maher.)

Anyway, Ensign thinks that the $560 each Iraqi would get from splitting up to half the oil profits each year would give residents of that country an incentive to keep the pipelines open and undamaged and oil production booming. Not that it’s about oil, of course. Oh, no. Ensign is all about the people, you see.

And here’s how he can prove it: A Nevada Gambling Trust, which would split the profits of the state’s casinos (for which Ensign’s father, Mike, and Ensign himself have toiled) among residents. That way, we’ll have an incentive not to get pissed off when they do things like demand retroactive premises liability laws to get out of expensive judgments or join the fight to ban smoking in the Silver State.

Let’s see. According to the Gaming Control Board, the total win for Nevada casinos in 2005-2006 fiscal year was $12.1 billion. And according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of Nevada (as of 2005) was 2,414,807. Let’s add for population growth since and round it off at an even 2,500,000, shall we?

Now we know Ensign would want to be as generous with us Americans as with Iraqis, so we’ll go ahead and peel half of that gaming win for our new Nevada Gambling Trust, for a total of $6.05 billion. And divide that by 2,500,000 residents and that’s $2,420 for each Nevadan, and that’s just for one year!

Yet another reason we’d rather live in Nevada than Iraq. Now, if you’ll excuse us, we’re off to spend our gambling windfall!

As most of you regular readers know, we at Various Things & Stuff are not lawyers. We’ve received most of our legal education from JAG, the many Law & Order shows, L.A. Law, and the new (and surprisingly good) Shark with James Woods. Also, we covered state and federal courts for a time in Sacramento, Calif.

The point: We’re not lawyers. We just play them on this blog. So don’t take anything you read herein as legal advice.

But we feel compelled to give our decidedly non-professional legal take, after reading the Nevada Resort Association’s amicus curiea brief regarding the legal fight against the anti-smoking Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act, which is set for an all-day hearing in District Court Judge Douglas Herndon’s courtroom today. We’re previously reported that the state’s biggest casinos have weighed in favoring the act, which appeared on the November ballot as Question 5.

The NRA’s brief is devastating to the tavern, convenience store, grocery store and slot route owners who are challenging the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act as vague and in violation of constitutional equal-protection rules. (They make those arguments in part because taverns with unrestricted gaming licenses — the same license the big casinos have — can continue to allow smoking in their facilities, but those with restricted licenses [15 or fewer slot machines] cannot. Moreover, whether the act applies in hotel and motel rooms seems to be a matter of some controversy.)

So, were we standing before Judge Herndon this morning representing the taverns, convenience stores, grocery stores and one cigar bar suing to keep the act from taking effect, here’s what we’d tell the court:

Your honor, the intervenors Nevada Resort Association argue that there is no question the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act does not apply to hotel and motel rooms. They state on Page 3 of their brief that, "No governmental officers are taking the position that it does apply to hotel/motel rooms. The proponents of this legislation stipulated before the Nevada Supreme Court that it did not apply to hotel/motel rooms and readily conceded that the public was told, when signatures were secured, that it does not apply to hotel and motel rooms. Simply put, there is no one, save the plaintiffs, who is arguing, let alone insinuating, that the restriction reaches hotel/motel rooms. Respectfully, plaintiffs cannot set up a straw man that does not exist in order to claim that the act presents constitutional problems."

Well, your honor, the NRA has created the straw man here. You see, the plaintiffs are not arguing that the act applies to hotel and motel rooms. They are arguing that the act may or may not apply to hotel and motel rooms, and that it is simply unclear.

Consider: The act bans smoking in "indoor places of employment." There is a list of exemptions, and hotel and motel rooms are not found on that list. Maids, maintenance workers and security officers are all employees of casinos. Their jobs regularly require them to enter hotel and motel rooms. Therefore, it would appear that those places are "indoor places of employment."

But don’t just listen to us. Listen to Carson City District Court Judge Bill Maddox, who concluded that the act would apply to hotel and motel rooms if it passed. The state Supreme Court did not say Maddox was wrong; the justices only said it was too early for him to make that call.

And it’s ironic that the NRA (and the state Supreme Court, for that matter) would resort to referencing the intentions of the people who put the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act on the ballot. Their intentions hardly matter when the initiative they circulated is so full of flaws, and so vague that even they have to guess at its meaning and application. But two can play at that game, your honor. The circulators of the act said it was their goal to keep people, especially children, safe from secondhand smoke. (They even named their group the "Nevadans for Tobacco Free Kids.") But children enter hotel rooms where there is secondhand smoke, don’t they? So then the intention of the framers of this initiative would clearly be to prohibit smoking in hotel and motel rooms, at least when children are present, right? Or would it? Again, your honor, the plaintiffs are not arguing either way; they are simply saying that the matter is vague and therefore unenforceable.

The NRA further argues that it was fully within the rights of the framers of the Clean Indoor Air Act to decide that big casinos (with nonrestricted gaming licenses) could allow smoking on their gaming floors, while smaller operations, say P.T.’s Pub for example, could not, since they generally have restricted gaming licenses.

Leaving aside for a moment whether that is legitimate or good public policy, let’s talk about what the plaintiffs have said in this regard: It appears wrong for two bars that are exactly the same size, do exactly the same thing but just happen to have different kinds of licenses to be treated differently. And yes, the plaintiffs have wondered whether, for example, a grocery store (where smoking is specifically banned) that just happens to have a nonrestricted license (where smoking is apparently allowed) can still let customers smoke if they choose. Once more, it’s vague.

(As a side note, the definition of casino in the act is interesting: "Casino means an entity that contains a building or a large room devoted to gambling games or wagering on a variety of events. A casino must possess a nonrestricted gaming license as described in NRS 463.0177 and typically uses the word ‘casino’ as part of its proper name." Now, how big "a large room" must be to qualify is open to speculation. Not only that, but we checked the websites of several NRA members, and found that none of them use "casino" as part of their proper names. Could smoking only be allowed at the Red Rock Casino from now on?)

The NRA argues that their business — big casinos — are different from the plaintiffs’ businesses, and therefore no equal protection violation can exist. "Restricted licenses are quite different," the NRA says in its brief on Page 9. "They are, for the most part, bar/restaurant, grocery or convenience store operations where family members will more often frequent with children than a nonrestricted gaming license. It is not irrational for the voters to conclude that children are more likely to be exposed to secondhand smoke in a restricted license environment than they are in a nonrestricted license environment."

Now judging the rationality of the voters is a tricky thing, so let us offer a few observations about this argument. First, children are specifically prohibited from entering or loitering in all the areas the NRA identifies, whether it be a slot alcove in a grocery store or the area set aside for gambling in convenience stores. They are for sure banned from bars and taverns. Is it rational for the voters to act to keep children safe from secondhand smoke in places where children may not go by law already? No.

And let’s take a look at some of these big casinos, shall we? Have you been to the Suncoast recently? That hotel has a movie theater, but to get there, you must walk by row upon row of slot machines, or through the sports book. Guess what’s allowed at those slots and in that sports book? Smoking. So family members frequenting the Suncoast certainly aren’t protected by this act.

What about the Mandalay Bay? Family members who want to dine at the House of Blues restaurant or perhaps the buffet will wait in line immediately adjacent to gaming areas where smoking is perfectly legal.

Let’s not even talk about Circus Circus, shall we? But if you want to take your kids shopping at the Forum Shops at Caesars and for some reason shun the valet and park in the hotel’s garage, you’ll be wading through slots and smoke to get there.

Your honor, you may agree with the NRA when it argues thus: "In order to achieve the legitimate economic goal of reducing the citizens of the state of Nevada’s exposure to secondhand smoke, the [act] drew a line regarding where it would and would not regulate smoking. In doing so, the [act] made choices based on [the] economic impact of banning smoking in large hotel casinos with nonrestricted licenses versus bars and taverns with restricted licenses whose primary business is not gaming. The drafters of the [act] made a valid decision to distinguish between the two in determining where smoking would be prohibited, a distinction the law allows them to make."

But what about a more stunning distinction. Consider a tale of two bars. One opened in 1979, had 5,000 square feet of space, serves food (as most bars do), and has a nonrestricted gaming license, which was the kind of license issued at that time in state history. But let’s say for space reasons, the bar only has 15 machines, although it could legally have more.

Now, let’s consider a bar that opened in 2006, also 5,000 square feet, also serving food. As you know, your honor, since 1989, such establishments can only get a restricted gaming license, and thus this second bar is limited to 15 machines, which it has.

Two bars, identical in all respects but for the kind of license issued. One may continue to allow smoking, one may not. These aren’t the different kinds of businesses cited by the NRA in its brief. They are exactly alike, but treated differently under the act. That’s the essence of an equal protection violation.

Finally, the NRA argues that the matter isn’t ripe for a ruling because these are "hypothetical situations," and we don’t know how the act will be implemented in the real world. Nobody has actually been cited for a violation yet, or threatened with a citation. (Of course they haven’t! Your honor issued a temporary restraining order in anticipation of this hearing today!)

But the NRA would have this court punt instead of tell us what this law means. And where does that get us? The plaintiffs don’t know if smoking is allowed or not, or in what areas or not. Customers don’t know if they’ll receive an expensive citation for lighting up a cigarette. Owners don’t know if they can be cited or fined, either. They’re not sure if they should build walls, knock out walls, or lay off their cooks and waitresses.

Yet the NRA is comfortable with this ambiguity? Why?

It is beyond obvious by now, your honor, that the NRA has taken the position that grants maximum benefit to its members, while imposing maximum hardship upon the plaintiffs. The NRA even hinted to the court the same, on Page 8 of its brief, when it wrote: "Clearly, the tourism industry, and casinos in general are Nevada’s driving economic force. The declared public policy of Nevada is that ‘[t]he gaming industry is vitally important to the economy of the state and the general welfare of the inhabitants. See NRS § 463.0129. Additionally, the revenue generated by the taxes imposed on hotels and casinos, in the form of entertainment taxes, gaming taxes, and room taxes, all contribute significantly to the state’s budget."

The plaintiffs don’t disagree that the NRA’s members contribute mightily to the state’s economy. (By the way, it should be noted that the plaintiff’s businesses also pay taxes and do their fair share to contribute to the state’s economy.)

But the plaintiffs do take issue with what’s written between those lines in the NRA brief: "He who has the gold makes the rules." The NRA, by virtue of the fact that it pays taxes, nonetheless does not have the right to get a tailor-made interpretation of state law that tends to hurt the plaintiffs, who, by the way, just happen to be competitors to the NRA’s members! Where do you think smoking customers of the bars, taverns, convenience stores and other businesses who are party to this action will go if they still want to smoke a cigarette and play video poker? To the Strip! To downtown! To a neighborhood casino! To places that still allow smoking.

If the NRA’s members want to compete, let them do so. But don’t let them use this lawsuit as a way to gain a tactical advantage for themselves over the plaintiffs. No amount of taxpaying justifies that.

For all of those reasons, your honor, we ask that you find the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act is impermissibly vague, that it constitutes a violation of the equal protection doctrines of the U.S. and Nevada constitutions, that there is an instant controversy and that a preliminary restraining order is appropriate. Thank you.

» You know, we just bet Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson is still steamed by that mean old state Sen. Dina Titus and her reckless "pay to play" lies about how he often took campaign contributions from people who regularly come before the City Council for business. Oh, wait.

» Quotable: "A lot of good ideas will come out of this. Some we won’t be able to implement. But you want to hear them. There may be a nugget that will save democracy. Democracy is not going to be saved in Washington, but in the Carson Cities of this country." — Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons, in a Review-Journal story on his 180-plus-person transition teams.

God. Help. Us.

But it’s also fun to note that, according to gubernatorial spokesman Brent Boynton, none of the 10 (count ‘em!) teams will either make policy or recommend a course of action to the governor. In fact, reports the Las Vegas Sun, the governor is not even aware of whether his teams are meeting. But everybody seems to agree that it’s a great public relations coup for Gibbons!

"From my vantage point it was a timely idea and a good idea. Whether it adds to the process or is workable, who’s going to know or care?" asked Republican consultant Pete Ernaut.

And with a philosophy like that, we can’t help but wonder how Ernaut could possibly have been passed over for a job as, say, secretary of defense?

» Speaking of the SecDef, we must agree with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday. After hearing that Vice President Dick Cheney had called Donald Rumsfeld "the finest secretary of defense this nation has ever had," Friedman said one of two things is true: Either President George W. Bush is a fool (for firing the nation’s finest defense secretary, in the middle of a war no less) or Cheney is lying.

Based on habit, we’re going to go with Cheney is lying. But that doesn’t mean that both options couldn’t simultaneously be true. We’re just saying.

» The Las Vegas Sun’s Jeff German, who carefully tracks these things, says the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority has spent $803,426 on legal fees surrounding the questionable 2004 sale of its "what happens here, stays here" slogan to ad agency R&R Partners for just $1. (Ooops! By using it, we think we owe the convention authority $1!)

Anyway, beyond proving that elected and appointed officials don’t really care what they do with room tax money, this story is proof that state Sen. Dina Titus and freshman Assemblyman Richard "Tick" Segerblom have a point when they say there’s definitely some convention authority cash available for other projects.

» Speaking of pissing away taxpayer dollars on questionable projects, both the city and the county get into the act.

» Quotable: "It’s a reasonable thing for people to start asking their doctor. Say: ‘I want you to be really careful and slow in examining my colon.’" — Dr. Douglas Rex, on a study that shows doctors who take their time during colonoscopies are more apt to find pre-cancerous polyps than those who hurry.

» Neonopolis, still failing. Go figure.

» We certainly hope all those right-wingers who bitched about the Marijuana Policy Project coming to Nevada to try to legalize an ounce of pot simply because our initiative process is relatively easy will issue similar statements denouncing the American Civil Rights Coalition. That group is considering Nevada for an initiative that would ban racial preferences in government hiring, contracting and university admissions. Damn out-of-state special interests!

» Since everybody has weighed in on the idea from state Sen. Bob Beers to arm schoolteachers in Nevada, we figured we would, too. By way of full disclosure, let us just say that we are what you’d generally classify as a "gun nut," owning a trio of pistols and a nifty rifle, too. We believe that you can never have too much ammo (or pizza, but that’s another post).

But we’re not exactly down with Beers’ idea, for the very simple reason that teachers are teachers, not special forces soldiers. They go to work every day with the mission of imparting knowledge, not defending themselves and their students against armed aggressors. That’s the job of the school police, and Metro.

Have you ever noticed that in police shootings, the suspect is often wounded in the hand, or foot, or that cops require multiple magazines to subdue an armed suspect? There’s a simple reason for that: stress. Even a highly trained police officer is not going to put every round in the 10-ring (sorry, that’s gun nut talk for "center of the target") in an actual, real-life shooting situation. We’d venture a guess that only special forces soldiers are able to do that (think Navy SEALs, Army Delta Force commandos or Marine force recon team members).

So if highly trained cops, who train and qualify with their weapons regularly, and come to work every day knowing they may be called upon to use deadly force, can still miss their targets, why would we expect teachers to do better?

Beers points up a legitimate problem (beyond the legitimate problem that Beers wasn’t getting his recommended daily allowance of media attention). The solution, we think, is to hire more people whose job it is to keep schools safe. And that’s school police officers, not teachers. Leave the three Rs to the pros, and leave the cop stuff to the pros, too.

At least that’s what this gun nut thinks.

» And finally today, any viewer of Fox News knows what conservatives mean when they say "fair." And that is this: A person or news organization that can be spun to the right-wing point of view, or at least one that ignores the faults and failures of the right.

That’s why the Review-Journal’s Ed Vogel shouldn’t be proud of landing on the "hot" list in Liberty Watch: The Magazine, known mostly around these parts for its willingness to publish KKK-worthy screeds from Las Vegas expatriate Ken Ward.

"Unlike most political links to journalism in Nevada, Vogel is one of the few remaining voices received as unbiased and fair," the clumsily phrased listing reads. "He sits and watches to interpret and deliver the meaningful inches of news that matter most to the Silver State."

Let’s translate that into human language, shall we? Vogel is one of the few (we count two, actually) journalists in town who doesn’t recognize Liberty Watch Publisher George Harris for what he really is: a total failure in the realm of politics. Harris, a colleague reminds is, is the most consistently wrong person in Nevada when it comes to backing political causes or accurately handicapping races. And the fact that the cover of Liberty Watch may be available for sale doesn’t add to his credibility.

Instead of shunning Harris, or at least treating him like the inconsequential gadfly that he is, Vogel actually seeks him out for quotes, as recently as Saturday. That’s all well and good; even people without anything meaningful to say should be allowed to jump into the conversation. But with Vogel’s disturbing tendency to give the right a little too much play, it would behoove him to ask why virtually nobody else in Nevada politics seems to regard Harris as interview-worthy. We can’t all be left-leaning socialists bent on the downfall of capitalism, can we?

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Nevada’s big casinos were notoriously absent from the debate over Question 5, the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act, before the Nov. 7 election. And why not? A ban on smoking was very popular, polls showed, and it specifically exempted gaming floors. What was there to gain by fighting it?

(Still, it should be noted that two casinos did contribute to the effort. Las Vegas Sands Corp., parent of The Venetian, gave the most at $100,000. The Las Vegas Hilton gave $5,000. But the majority of contributors were taverns and slot route operators.)

But those casinos aren’t staying on the sidelines any longer. As first reported Sunday by our colleague Ian Mylchreest of the Las Vegas Business Press, and then by us at Various Things & Stuff, the Nevada Resort Association is trying today to intervene in the lawsuit against the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act. And judging by a copy of initial court papers put up on the web by our colleague Jon Ralston, this is going to be a doozy.

The association argues, via Schreck Brignone attorney Todd Bice, that the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act isn’t vague when it comes to banning smoking in hotel and motel rooms. (The act’s actual language bans smoking "in indoor places of employment.")

Now, that’s a bold assertion, given that Carson City District Court Judge Bill Maddox found that it did ban smoking in hotel and motel rooms, since maids, maintenance workers, security officers and others are required to enter hotel and motel rooms in the course of their jobs. Tellingly, the backers of the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act, aka Nevadans for Tobacco-Free Kids, argued its initiative did not ban smoking in hotel and motel rooms. (Why? But of course: The smoke banners didn’t want big casinos throwing millions into an effort to defeat the initiative, which surely would have happened if casino bosses thought their business were being targeted by the initiative.)

Still, if the authors of the initiative say the document doesn’t do something, but a judge finds that it does do that thing, at the very least you have what folks in the legal business like to call a "justiciable controversy." Translated, it means the language of the initiative is unclear on its face, and therefore requires legal interpretation. That means, to coin a phrase, that it’s vague.

But the Nevada Resort Association also appears to be targeting a key argument that the bar, tavern and convenience store owners have raised: That the act creates an equal protection violation in that it treats similar establishments differently, based upon whether they have a nonrestricted (15 or more slot machines) or a restricted (15 or fewer machines) gambling license. (Under the act, bars with an unrestricted gambling license may be allowed to continue to offer smoking, whereas bars with restricted licenses most certainly cannot.) This, plaintiffs argue, is illegal under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause (which applies to corporations inasmuch as courts have found they have the legal status of people; we at Various Things & Stuff don’t necessarily agree with that, but it’s another argument for another day).

"To the extent the court or plaintiffs deem otherwise, the Resort Association denies that the [Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act] creates any unconstitutional classifications with respect to the distinction between businesses with restricted gaming licenses and nonrestricted gaming licenses," Bice’s filing says.

So the question of the hour (at least until we read the brief, scheduled to be filed today, just one day before the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act goes before District Court Judge Douglas Herndon for review) is why? Why would casinos not fight this initiative all the way, thus protecting their rights to continue to allow smoking as well as everybody else’s rights to allow it, too?

Welcome to Nevada, folks, where the casinos look out for their own interests, and nobody else’s. It’s not surprising, either. Casinos are not the protectors of civil liberties. They’re for-profit businesses that tend to their bottom lines out of a legal responsibility to their shareholders. (Speaking of, does anybody else think some in the casino industry expect to pick up business from smokers who still want to enjoy a cigarette while playing video poker? Bye bye P.T.’s Pub; hello Mirage and Mandalay Bay!)

Personally, we think it would be better had casinos jumped into this fight early, declared that this is Nevada, where the economy relies almost exclusively on tourism, and that such reliance demands we continue to let guests smoke or not smoke to their heart’s content. If a casino chose to attract nonsmokers, it could do so voluntarily (one actually tried, as we recall, but had to switch back due to the loss of business).

But casinos chose, mostly, to sit out the Question 5 fight, probably for fear of a voter/customer backlash against a popular measure, and possibly thinking they had nothing to fear even if it passed. And now, they’re fighting for the smoke-banning initiative, so long as Herndon declares that hotel and motel rooms are not covered by the act.

Silly casinos! Do we have to remind you of what you’re fighting? Do you not recall the words of Buffy Martin Tarbox, the government relations director for the American Cancer Society, who said right after the Nov. 7 election that a ban on smoking inside casinos was "absolutely" on the horizon and that "I do think Nevada will become 100 percent smoke free in the future"? Do you not see Those Who Know Better will simply not stop until they have imposed their will on every Nevada business?

Benjamin Franklin said of revolutionary fathers that "we must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." It appears Nevada’s casinos have made the latter choice.

So the powerful Nevada Resort Association has decided to intervene in the fight against the anti-smoking Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act. But get this: The group is intervening on the side of the defendants who want to ban smoking!

The NRA is taking issue with the tavern and convenience store owners fighting to strike down the voter-approved initiative, specifically by arguing that the initiative is clear in that smoking is not banned in hotel and motel rooms. (The plaintiffs have argued it’s unclear whether smoking would be banned there.) And, even more tellingly, the NRA is taking issue with the notion that the act violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by apparently banning smoking in bars with unrestricted gaming licenses (those with 15 or more machines) but not in bars with restricted (15 or fewer machines) gaming licenses.

Do big casinos — whose floors are exempt from the smoking ban — see dollar signs from smoking customers who are no longer able to light up in front of their favorite video poker machines at their local P.T.’s Pub? We’ll find out more tomorrow, when the NRA brief is scheduled to be filed.

Oh, and for those keeping score at home, yes, that is Dec. 18, just one day before District Court Judge Douglas Herndon takes up the issue of whether to grant a preliminary restraining order that prevents authorities from enforcing the act. Nothing like giving your legal adversaries a lot of notice, is there?

So it appears the Regional Transportation Commission has conducted a study that shows that the timing of traffic lights is up to 60 percent better in some places, and that travel times on those special streets have been cut, between 32 percent and 45 percent.

Now, we know the Review-Journal has to report on these things. Hell, we encourage it. The problem we’ve always had is how the story is reported, with way too much credulity. We have to wade five paragraphs into Omar Sofradzija’s story before we learn this is an RTC-conducted study of the RTC!

Here’s how he led the piece:

"Statistics indicate stoplight synchronization is improving in the Las Vegas Valley.

"Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman’s gut says that’s bunk."

Now, we happen to agree with Goodman’s gut on this one. But this is how the story should have begun, in our humble view.

A study conducted by the Regional Transportation Committee says the committee is doing a better job on timing signal lights on certain roads. The RTC claims timing is improved by up to 60 percent.

Why are we so cynical, you ask? Because, like Goodman, we drive on those roads every day, and we see for ourselves that signal light timing is often awful. In Goodman’s words: "I don’t know how much money has been spent. Whatever it was, it’s a waste of money. I’m not having the pleasant experience that’s been represented to us."

Exactly! Goodman is judging the RTC’s claims based upon what he’s seen in the real world. And so should transportation journalists, assuming they actually drive in the real world. We’ve seen Sofradzija’s TV commercial, in which he gets in somebody’s car and tells a surprised drive the route he should take, so we assume Sofradzija drives, too. And there’s nothing wrong with calling bullshit when you hear it from the RTC.

One thing that did come out in Sofradzija’s article struck a note with us: Signal timing becomes impossible when signals are placed too close together. And since every whiny request to get a signal light in the middle of a block is granted with Pavlovian efficiency by local officials, we know some of the blame belongs with the city and the county, not with the RTC.

Where we used to live, in fact, there were two mid-block signal lights between major streets, and a total of 11 signal lights between our flat and the Summerlin Parkway. They were rarely timed correctly. Even worse, they were programmed on a timer, so they would stop traffic on Sahara Avenue (a six-lane, major arterial street) to allow … well, nobody … to exit from a shopping mall, even late at night. Ditto for left-turn signals, which would turn green for phantom eastbound cars that didn’t exist, when there were three lanes of cars waiting an extra 20 seconds to go west.

So that’s how we know the RTC’s self-contratulatory study is suspect. And that’s how Goodman knows the study is suspect. We suspect Sofradzija knows it’s suspect, too, but is constrained by the false notion of "objectivity" from saying so outright.

But in the spirit of the RTC study, we at Various Things & Stuff have just completed a comprehensive analysis that shows we produce the best blog in town. It’s up to 60 percent better than blogs written by our colleagues Jon Ralston, Anjeanette Damon, Hugh Jackson and Scandalmonger!

Anybody skeptical? You should be.

Forgive us readers. We thought Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons‘ transition teaming was complete, and that there would be no more teams. We were mistaken. It was announced today that an "at-large" transition team had been appointed to give Gibbons "advise and counsel on a wide variety of subjects."

The team includes some very distinguished people indeed, including Dacole Co. chairman T.J. Day, who will lead the team; Terry Lanni, chairman and CEO of MGM Mirage; former state Sen. Ann O’Connell; current state Sen. Randolph Townsend and attorney, lobbyist and developer Harvey Whittemore.

It’s a shame they’ll find themselves on the same committee as George Harris, publisher of Liberty Watch: The Magazine, a right-wing propaganda outlet that we suspect takes money from people in exchange for being featured in the magazine, especially on the cover. (We’ve asked Harris and Editor Mike Zigler about this, but both failed to answer our question directly.) During the Republican primary, in fact, Liberty Watch regularly slammed Gibbons in favor of the more conservative state Sen. Bob Beers, who according to his financial disclosure statements, in an officer in Harris Liberty Media LLC.

How, we wonder, will the team members listed above, along with lobbyists Greg Ferraro and Sam McMullen, former state Sen. Sue Lowden, businessman Luther Mack Jr., attorney George F. Ogilvie III and banker George W. Smith, react when they learn they are sitting on a board with a man who publishes racist diatribes? In the most recent Liberty Watch, Harris allows columnist (and former Review-Journal scribe) to muse upon the fact that minorities commit most of the crime in the country, and wonders why the media and cops don’t "call a spade a spade."

Nice work, George.

And nice work, Gibbons.

We can’t wait to see what "advice and counsel" Harris proffers that will help guide the state.

Our hearty congratulations to the Pahrump Town Board, for rejecting a Nazi-era ordinance that would have required all illegal immigrants to register with the town, pay a $200 fee and list all their relatives living in Nevada. The ordinance, by town board member Michael Miraglia, was voted down 2-2.

Even better comes signs that the incoming town board might undo some of Miraglia’s old handiwork: An ordinance that makes English Pahrump’s official language, and bans flying a foreign flag without Old Glory, too.

Miraglia’s off the town board now, but has said he aspires to higher office. He may have like-minded company, say incoming Assemblyman-elect Ty Cobb, R-Reno, who wants to deny all state services to illegal immigrants, or Weasel-in-Chief Lt. Gov.-elect Brian Krolicki, who in 2005 tried to keep illegal immigrants who earned the Millennium Scholarship from getting it.

A battle was won, but the war on hatred continues…

» Quotable: "Christians are quite clearly taught to turn the other cheek and to love their enemies. It is equally true that no one should forfeit their lives to an aggressor who is bent on inflicting death." — from the website of Murrieta, Calif.-based Left Behind Games Inc., which produces the Eternal Forces video game in which pro-Christian players kill members of a one-world-government police force fielded by the Antichrist.

Yes, we can’t recall anybody in the history of Christendom who ever forfeited his life to an aggressor bent on inflicting death. Can you?

» Mayor Oscar Goodman will be teaching a class at the Community College of Southern Nevada, about the making of martinis.

Oh, Chancellor Jim Rogers. Where are you with your angry memos when we really need you?

» We’re big fans of the correction box in the Review-Journal. You can learn a lot about a newspaper from seeing how honest it is about reporting its mistakes. And today’s correction box contains a doozy. Here’s what it said:

"A photo illustration that ran with a story about Nevada’s business secrecy laws in the Sunday Business section included an incorrect picture. A picture from Inhale Solutions’ Web site that the company listed as its Las Vegas office building at 1117 Desert Lane was not shown. The picture in the illustration was listed on the Web site as Inhale Solution’s office building in Signal Hill, Calif."

So it’s a simple case of using the wrong photo, right? Just a little mix up in the hurly burly of putting out a garden-variety regional newspaper.

But check out what the Review-Journal story by writers John Edwards and A.D. Hopkins actually said:

"Inhale Solutions, a company based in Signal Hill, Calif., that sells gum for cleaning a smoker’s breath until recently showed a picture of a modern, two-story building on its Web site.

"The building bears the name Inhale Solutions, and its address is shown as 1117 Desert Lane, a side street near Charleston Boulevard and Interstate 15.

"The building at that address looks nothing like the one formerly pictured on the Web site.

"The structure is a one-story, 55-year-old, 1,600-square-foot office building used by Nevada First Holdings, a company that specializes in helping companies incorporate in Nevada. Inhale Solutions is a client of Nevada First.

"Calls to Inhale Solutions Chief Executive Matthew Willer about the photo were not returned."

Accompanying the story were two photos, one of a nice gleaming office building that carried a caption reading "Pictures on the Web site for smoker’s-breath-cleaning gum seller Inhale Solutions suggest the company’s local offices look like this…"

Immediately below that was a photo of a rundown little building here in town, that carried the rest of the caption, "…but Inhale Solutions’ offices are in this building, which is one story shorter, older looking and used by Nevada First Holdings."

So, we’ve caught Inhale Solutions in a bit of false advertising, eh? The dastardly bastards have been trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes?

Not even close. Check out the actual photo from the website that ran with the R-J story. Not clear enough? Well, check it out here, as it currently exists on the company’s website (as late as this morning).

Notice anything? How about the fact that the address of the building that the R-J suggested was somewhere around Charleston and I-15 is actually listed as an address on Industry Drive in Signal Hill?

The R-J didn’t "include an incorrect picture" in their story! It used the right photo of the company’s headquarters, but then made up an allegation that were totally false!

This begs the following questions: How in the hell did no one look at the photo while writing the story, especially a story in which the lead rests on an entirely false premise? Why did an editor not see the glaring mistake, and fix it before it went to press? Are there editors at the R-J’s business desk? Or anywhere in that building? And how in the hell can the R-J even attempt to get away with simply saying it simply "included an incorrect picture" when really its reporters got the tale totally, completely and obviously wrong?

Like we said, you can learn a lot about a newspaper from the corrections box.

CORRECTION (Oct. 18, 2007): After a version of this story was published in the Oct. 11, 2007 edition of CityLife, we at Various Things & Stuff received a complaint from the Review-Journal. Upon further investigation, we discovered an earlier version of Inhale Solutions website that did, in fact, contain a photograph of a two-story office building beside an address of 1117 Desert Lane, Las Vegas, NV. (According to research on the website archive.org, the page was altered sometime between Dec. 5, 2006 and Dec. 8, 2006 to remove the photograph and address of the alleged Las Vegas building.) Therefore, while the original photo illustration in the R-J’s story of Dec. 10, 2006, was incorrect, the correction published Dec. 13, 2006, was accurate. We at Various Things & Stuff regret the error.

» And finally today, we note that the Citizens Against Government Waste are slamming Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons, who failed to return to Washington, D.C. for the lame-duck session of Congress. Gibbons claims he’s attending to his pre-gubernatorial duties, but with scores of people on his transition teams, perhaps he could have broken a little time free.

"It’s absolutely pathetic," roared David Williams, vice president of the anti-waste group. "This is their job: to cast votes."

But we think Williams may be trying to have his cake and eat it, too. Remember back in December 2003, when Citizens Against Government Waste named Gibbons its Porker of the Month for voting for funds to repair a Sparks swimming pool?

So they jump on his case for voting, and they jump on his case for not voting. Sometimes, a guy just can’t win, you know?

» We don’t know how we could have forgotten, but we did. There was big news today, people! Our very own U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley was named to the House Ways & Means Committee. That’s a job long sought by every member of Nevada’s House delegation since John Ensign left in 1998 to unsuccessfully challenge U.S. Sen. Harry Reid.

The appointment is especially welcome because Berkley hasn’t always had the best relationship with Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Berkley backed pal Steny Hoyer for majority leader over Pelosi in 2001, and she defied Pelosi again in supporter Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, for majority leader over the Pelosi-endorsed John Murtha this year.

But all is forgotten, or at least temporarily set aside.

According to our research staff, Berkley is the first woman from Nevada to serve on the Ways & Means Committee, which handles trade and tariffs, health care, Social Security and a host of laws that affect industries like gambling and mining. (Federal gambling tax? Yeah, we don’t see that happening.)

So, congratulations to Berkley.

» And while we’re blogging, we can’t help but notice another couple transition teams from Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons, who himself never managed to snag a seat on Ways & Means. Or Appropriations. Or the chairmanship of Intelligence.

But whatever, people! He’s moved on. And so will we. To the business & industry and tourism and gaming transition teams!

We’ll bet you can guess the chair of the business group. Why, yes, it is Kara Kelley, president of the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, which endorsed Gibbons for governor. The chamber is also simpatico with Gibbons’ anti-tax stances (and, we’re compelled to add, has as many good ideas for how to pay for vital services without taxes, which is to say, none). Also from the virulently anti-tax crowd: Mary Lau, president and CEO of the Retail Association of Nevada.

On the group are Republican Assemblyman Chad Christensen, whose creative approach to campaign finance accounting is literally record-breaking, and Lt. Gov.-elect Brian Krolicki, who has time on his hands now that he’s worked out the biggest dilemma he will face in his term in that office: where his actual office will be located. Also, Brady Industries CEO Bill Brady, who dropped out of a race for state senate under very mysterious circumstances, is emerging from the shadows to take part in this team.

Other high-profile business types involved include Jones Vargas President (and GOP national committeeman) Joe Brown, Rogich Communications Vice President Chris Cole, state Sen. Warren Hardy, ex-state Sen. Mark James, now CEO of the Frias Holding Co. and Tom Warden, vice president of communications and government relations at the Howard Hughes Co.

When it comes to tourism, Las Vegas Sands Corp. Chairman Bill Weidner will be heading things up, serving alongside longtime Venetian spokesman Andy Abboud. Wait, what’s this? Breaking with tradition, a true union representative on a Gibbons transition team? Why, it’s none other than D. Taylor, secretary-treasurer of the Culinary Union Local 226, which picketed the Venetian before it was even open and fought a public-sidewalks lawsuit all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and won! We’ll just bet that Taylor and the Culinary are still dreaming of organizing workers at The Venetian.

Awkward!

Also on the tourism team are Lewis & Roca lobbyist Alfredo Alonso, Democratic ex-Mayor Jan Jones (say it isn’t so, Jan!), MGM Mirage vice president for corporate diversity and community relations Punam Mathur, Station Casinos chief lawyer Scott Neilson, as well as Station Vice President of corporate and government relations Lesley Pittman, ex-Attorney General candidate Scott Scherer and Luis Valera, director of public affairs for the Nevada Resort Association.

Well, that’s it folks. We think the Gibbons people are done transition teaming, since there’s only like 15 Nevadans left who aren’t on one of the many teams. We can’t wait to see what the come up with!

» So Gov. Kenny Guinn met with Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons, and spokesman for both men tried to convince the public that they don’t hate each other. No, it’s a simple matter of political differences!

Guinn and Gibbons "may have had some political differences, but never have had any personal problems with each other and have been working together on the transition," says Brent Boynton, Gibbons’ spokesman.

We know Boynton hasn’t been around the campaign for very long, so he may not know about the fact that, say, Guinn ran Republicans for Miller when Democratic ex-Gov. Bob Miller was seeking the governorship back in 1994. Who was the Republican candidate in that race? Oh, that’s right! Gibbons.

But surely Boynton knows that Guinn has been "working" on the transition in the sense that "working" means "screwing his successor as hard and as often as possible." That’s why Gibbons says he’ll put just "small fingerprints" on Guinn’s proposed budget. (As in "small fingerprints on the knife I use to carve out a whole lot of Guinn’s ideas.")

"There may have been disagreements on some policies, but that happens in politics. You’re not always going to agree," says Guinn spokesman Steve George. Yes, just a little disagreement in which Gibbons totally screwed Guinn by criticizing his tax plan in front of the entire Legislature, emboldening Assembly Republicans to hold up his plan. (The Legislature ultimately adopted a lamer plan.) We’re sure Guinn has forgotten about that by now.

Anyway, a picture is worth a thousand words, so take a look at this shot of Guinn and Gibbons. Do they look like old friends to you?

» Oh, thank God! The crisis has been averted! And Weasel-in-Chief Brian Krolicki gets to stay on the ground floor of the Capitol, instead of having to walk up all those stairs to obscurity on the second floor of the building.

It all started when Krolicki (aka "the whiner") didn’t want to give his first-floor office to Kate Marshall, which was odd, since Marshall was elected to the job that Krolicki now holds, state treasurer. After contemplating and wussing out of more important races, Krolicki had opted for the relatively obscure post of lieutenant governor. The problem? The lieutenant governor has an office on the second floor!

Commence whining, excuse-making, rationalizing, etc. from Krolicki about how he should get to keep his own office. It was embarrassing, kindergarten-like behavior that didn’t end even when he was publicly mocked for it! You’ve got to give it up for the Man Who Never Knew Shame!

But thanks to some accommodating governor’s office employees, Krolicki will get to move his desk to an annex on the east side of the Capitol building, just 30 steps from his old office, says the Review-Journal. Some of Gibbons’ new employees will take over the lieutenant governor’s office upstairs.

Now there’s a crisis averted, and in a symbolic way, too. Out in Washington, the West Wing of the White House is where the president works. The East Wing (kind of where Krolicki will be working come January) is reserved for the First Lady. No offense to ladies, of course.

» Reid’s free! The Senate Ethics Committee found there was "not substantial, credible evidence" that U.S. Sen. Harry Reid broke ethics laws when he accepted boxing credentials worth hundreds of dollars for free. Ethics gadfly Robert Rose had asked the committee to look into Reid’s acceptance of the tickets, which he promised never to do again after the matter was reported publicly.

We’re not sure we totally agree with the committee’s reasoning, given that the credentials could not help but be seen as a gift, albeit one from the Nevada Boxing Commission and not a private company or person seeking to influence the senator. But they are the final word, and we are not. We do, however, agree 100 percent with Reid, who said after the flap that he ought to have known the difference between something legal and ethical, and something that just doesn’t look right.

Amen, senator. And that’s not a bad lesson to carry into your new job as Senate majority leader.

» You know, we can honestly say that we’ve never really wanted to go to a North Las Vegas State of the City speech before. It’s not that we don’t think Mayor Mike Montandon wouldn’t give a good speech. (He could talk about, say, political money laundering.) It’s just that, well, we don’t really care about what happens in North Las Vegas.

Well, this year, things are different. We received in the mail the snazziest invite to a state of the anything speech we’ve ever gotten. It was an actual 3-D picture, with the city of North Las Vegas logo hovering over a pretty blue sky, with clouds. The North Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce logo was there, too, since that group sponsors the event.

We’ll tell you, we are even now scrambling to clear our calendar for Jan. 11, which is when the speech takes place at the Texas Station hotel-casino. (It’s emceed by our friend Mitch Fox, and North Las Vegas Chamber President Bob Hart is going to give a business update.) Man, if this speech is anything like this invitation (which is to say, if the speech is also three-dimensional) it’s going to totally rock!

In the meantime, we’ll just pin this invite up to our bulletin board and admire it.