You know, we were just talking to the delightful Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto the other day, and we had no idea she was even contemplating an appeal in that brothel advertising case that CityLife won the other day. (Oh, sure, our crack attorney — Allen Lichtenstein of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada — had a little something to do with the victory, too. But we have to say, we signed one hell of an affidavit!)

(You remember the case, Coyote Publishing et. al. v. Heller: CityLife and other plaintiffs sued the state over a law that says advertising for legal brothels is banned in counties in Nevada where prostitution is illegal. So even though the Shady Lady Ranch is a legal, licensed and regulated business in Nye County, it was illegal for CityLife to publish ads from the company. Since the ruling was handed down in July, the Shady Lady has been running ads in the paper.)

But today, we got a news release from Cortez Masto’s office, saying she’s going to appeal U.S. District Court Judge James Mahan’s ruling, which struck down the laws for a variety of reasons, all of them good.

But Cortez Masto sees it differently: "The people of this state have placed restrictions on brothel advertising for 40 years," she said in the news release. "In reviewing the decision of the federal court, I have concerns about the legal standard used by the judge in determining that our state’s longstanding limitations on brothel advertising were constitutionally invalid. To protect the will of Nevadans to place reasonable restrictions on brothel advertising, my office will appeal this decision. This will allow our state to clarify the standard for reviewing our existing law and could help the Legislature should a new law be crafted."

That’s it? The law has been on the books for 40 years and it’s the will of the people? (Technically, we should note, it was the will of the people 40 years ago; these things change, you know.) Plus, many laws have been on the books for a long time; that doesn’t make them valid. A review of those laws may have been long in coming, but to our way of thinking (again, we’re a plaintiff, so we’re biased) it packs no less a constitutional punch because it took 40 years to get to court.

The fact is, the anti-brothel advertising law violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as other court rulings on similar subjects. Mahan saw that, and we’re confident the Ninth Circuit will, too.

But you know what? We’re not at all upset. Because Cortez Masto is right about one thing: We all need the guidance of the Ninth Circuit, just in case the moralists in the Legislature try to craft an even stupider law the next time around. So, on to San Francisco, and to justice!

U.S. Sen. John Ensign’s always been kind of odd. His pre-political career was both as a casino manager and a veterinarian. He lives in a house in Washington D.C. run by a secretive religious organization. He doesn’t think much of government, but he spent a lot of money to become part of government. He doesn’t mind lying, even if it’s to deny he said something that he really said.

But even we were surprised to see Ensign’s comments about the scandal surrounding U.S. Sen. Larry Craig, who will very likely announce tomorrow that he’s not seeking re-election, due largely to Craig’s guilty plea to disorderly conduct charges after being arrested in a sting targeting people seeking anonymous gay sex in a Minneapolis airport restroom.

(Oh, snap! Even as we were writing that, news broke that Craig will announce his resignation tomorrow! Damn, we are good. We can totally see the future! And in our own, personal future looms … a couch. A TV. And an ice-cold Corona. It’s scary how good we are at this!)

Anyway, here’s what Ensign said:

"I wouldn’t put myself, hopefully, in that kind of position like that but if I was in a position like that, I think that’s [resign] what I would do," Ensign said. "He’s going to have to answer that for himself. I think the pressure will continue to build."

Um, "hopefully"? Ensign "hopefully" wouldn’t put himself in a position like that? Did he really mean to say that he cannot guarantee to his constituents that he won’t be caught trolling for gay sex in airport restrooms? Sure, he hopes he won’t put himself in that position, but hey, things happen, so what are you gonna do?

C’mon, Ensign! Promising to avoid lewd and lascivious charges is the least you can do! You’re vice presidential material now! Do you think they just want you for your looks? (Well, yes, they do: Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson aren’t exactly spring chickens.) But it’s more than that! It’s your church-inspired moralism, too! If you can’t at least guarantee you won’t pull a Craig, or a David Vitter, or a Mark Foley, you’re going to be off the list!

» We see where the Democratic parties in the early primary/caucus states — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina — are calling on candidates to sign a pledge promising not to campaign in other states that have moved their primaries forward in violation of the rules of the Democratic National Committee.

"I believe the pledge we asked the presidential candidates to sign sends a strong message from Nevada and our early-state companions that the pre-window must be respected," said Nevada’s Democratic Party Chairwoman Jill Derby, in a news release. "We need to bring order, predictability and common sense to the presidential nominating calendar and focus on electing a president who will deal with the ongoing war in Iraq, health care and renewable energy, instead of focusing on selecting dates to hold our nominating contests."

Holy shit! We’re not 100 percent sure, but we think Derby just endorsed Dennis Kucinich! Should she be doing that before the soon-to-be-overlooked Nevada caucus is even held?

Anyway, it seems to us that protesting too much is but more of the deeply felt Nevada Inferiority Complex that crops up around here from time to time. Sending out a pledge (what, it is a one-page form that says "Nevada: Do you like me?" with check boxes for yes and no?) to demonstrate the state’s strength only makes the state look weak. It’s a Zen thing.

Having said that, however, we understand that the campaigns of New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and U.S. Sen. Joe Biden have already signed the pledge. And we happen to know for 100 percent sure that both Richardson and Biden did it because they love Nevada, and not because they don’t have enough money to run multi-state campaigns at this stage of the nominating process. That totally has nothing to do with it. In fact, we feel silly even having to bring it up.

» What? Jon Porter, the worst person in the world? The entire world? Really? In a world of murderers, ethnic cleansers, religious demagogues, corporate swindlers, e-mail spam businesses, Karl Rove, child abusers, rapists, corrupt public officials, terrorists, Dick Cheney, cell-phone grasping movie talkers and assholes who start shooting on the Strip or in crowded casinos?

Oh, what’s that? MSNBC host Keith Olbermann was commenting on Porter’s claim (allegedly told to him by war-zone commanders) that gas would rise to $9 per gallon if the United States withdrew troops too soon? And he was reminding people that when liberal protests objected that the war was motivated by oil (remember "No Blood for Oil" signs?), Republicans said they were full of it, but now at least one Republican is justifying staying longer because of fears about … not having enough cheap oil?

Well, OK, then.

» We at Various Things & Stuff are well-known for crusading for a living wage. We supported the increase in Nevada’s minimum wage via constitutional amendment, and we applaud the efforts of unions to preserve the besieged middle-class.

That’s why our hearts bled when we read about this Washington, D.C. man who was forced to quit his job in order to find more gainful employment so he could raise his three kids. The man, Tony Snow, was eking out a subsistence-level living on a mere $168,000 per year.

Why, the poor bastard! Who could live on that? We know homeless panhandlers who have it better!

Now, you may argue that the median income in Nevada is $50,819 (according to a three-year average between 2004-2006 as estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau). And the median income in the United States is $48,200. So, technically, Snow was making more than three families who earn either Nevada’s, or America’s, median income. (For that matter, he’s earning what 13 Nevada minimum wage earners make in a year.)

And you may also argue that Snow’s admission that "I ran out of money" is an incredibly arrogant, insensitive and churlish remark, given that his salary is three times the median salary in America. Should all of us making less than Snow run down to the local welfare office and apply for our Tony Snow Income Gap Grants?

And you may further argue that Snow, in his job as White House press secretary, often tried to spin, deceive, insult and cajole the press to prevent them from reporting the truth, so every dollar of that $168,000 was spent for the purposes of evil, untruth and such.

And you’d pretty much be right. We think we’ll just leave it there.

» And finally today, something odd.

The Review-Journal published a correction in today’s newspaper, pointing to an error in an Aug. 23 business story about a company called Meridias Capital. It seems that company no longer underwrites loans.

But when we went to the R-J’s search page to investigate, the paper told us that there were no stories with that name that had been published in the last 14 days, which would include Aug. 23, last Thursday.

We expanded our search to the last six months. Again, no hits.

All of 2007. No hits.

All years. Nothing.

We even went so far as to search every single business section story that had been published on Aug. 23. And we couldn’t find that story on that page, either.

We tried variations on the spelling of "Meridias," thinking either the original story, or the correction, had misspelled the company’s name along with misstating its business. Again, no luck. So we repeated our original search, with the same results.

Has a story disappeared from the R-J’s database? That would be most troubling indeed. But at 5 p.m. today, at least, it simply doesn’t seem to be there.

Any reader out there still have a copy of the print version of the Aug. 23 newspaper? We’d sure be interested in seeing that.