Glenn Reynolds, by way of Clayton Cramer, cites a curious statement by Gray Davis:

"My vision is to make the most diverse state on earth, and we have people from every planet on the earth in this state. We have the sons and daughters of every, of people from every planet, of every country on earth," he said.
(Emphasis added.)

Now, this may be a simple slip of the tongue or confirmation of California's... unique characteristics. I think it's something entirely different - the answer to a difficult problem with our economic statistics.

In its current survey of the world economy, the Economist describes America's burgeoning current-account deficit, but also notes a problem with its calculation (subscription required):

Some of the recent rise may be a statistical quirk. According to official numbers, the world as a whole runs a current-account deficit with itself, and one that has risen sharply since 1997. Since the world does not, as yet, trade with Mars, the numbers must be wrong, so some of America's current-account deficit may be more apparent than real. But not all of the recent rise, or even most of it, can be explained this way.
(Emphasis added.)

Are they really sure that there is no extraterrestrial trade? Perhaps the Economist's correspondent should've stopped in Sacramento while researching the survey. And the hopefully-soon-to-be-former Governor Davis may be bucking for a job as Commerce Secretary in a Dean Administration (though the extraterrestrial trade expertise may be more relevant for a Kucinich Administration).

It belongs to Dahlia Lithwick:

There's really only one way to read the panel's decision from Monday. It's a sauce-for-the-gander exercise in payback. Pure and simple. The panel not only refused to accept the Supremes' admonition that the nation would not be fooled again; it refused even to address it. Applying Bush v. Gore again and again in the unanimous opinion, the judges told the high court that it has no power to declare a case a one-ride ticket and defied the court to step in again to tell them otherwise. (The court isn't likely to step in, as many have now noted, because they cannot win if they do. By getting involved, they risk either looking corrupt and partisan if they reverse the decision or permitting the courts to legislate things like the distances between polling places and the pant-length for elections workers for all eternity.)

Reading the opinion, you can almost hear the panel saying: "Hey, let's not just halt this recall, let's have a little fun with the thing!" The opinion includes a fond historical nod to voting with fava beans and the wry observation that punch cards are "intractably afflicted with technologic dyscalculia." It's tough to count the number of times the judges gleefully point out that the secretary of state is barred from defending the punch-card machines because he is already subject to a consent decree holding that they suck.

For more substantive commentary, check out law professor Rick Hansen, whose amicus brief helped inspire the 9th Circuit's decision, and his nemesis (on this subject) Mickey Kaus. Each has a myriad of links on the subject.

...as a member of the Neocon Conspiracy to Conquer the World (TM), that is.

How else do you explain a column that begins with the following?

It's time we Americans came to terms with something: France is not just our annoying ally. It is not just our jealous rival. France is becoming our enemy.

France wants America to sink in a quagmire there in the crazy hope that a weakened U.S. will pave the way for France to assume its "rightful" place as America's equal, if not superior, in shaping world affairs.

The column is titled, of course, "Our War with France."

Aside from the concluding paragraph, there is nothing in the column that couldn't have come from the Weekly Standard, Opinion Journal or any of the other usual conspirators.

Interestingly, Friedman notes the following:

Yes, the Bush team's arrogance has sharpened French hostility. Had President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld not been so full of themselves right after America's military victory in Iraq — and instead used that moment, when the French were feeling that maybe they should have taken part, to magnanimously reach out to Paris to join in reconstruction — it might have softened French attitudes. But even that I have doubts about.
(Emphasis added.)

I guess he doesn't agree with Fred Kaplan about how US-European disagreements over Iraq are all President Bush's fault.

...in its contest with the Blair government for "Bigger Liar," that is. As Andrew Sullivan notes, the reporter in question is toast. Click here for an assessment of the BBC's claims and how they stand up. (Some of them do.)

Via Robert Musil, the Econopundit has some fascinating guesstimates of the impact of the effort to rebuild Iraq on the US economy.
Good stuff.

James Lileks' Bleat for today takes on an editorial in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune and the mindset behind it. (Click here and scroll down for links to the editorial's sources). I cannot disagree with or excerpt from a single part of Lileks' rant; go read it.

Here's the wedding invitation of Chanan Sand and Nava Applebaum:

(Thanks to Ephraim Shapiro for the image.)

Apparently the Jerusalem Post is in great disarray and has been for a while, with matters seemingly reaching a crisis point following its recent editorial advocating the killing of Yasser Arafat. Allison Kaplan Sommer, a former reporter for the JPost, has the scoop (and click here for more). We look forward to reading her tell-all memoirs of her time at the JPost - sounds like she has a lot of dirt to dish.

Here's a great NYT piece on the connections between Saudi Arabia and Hamas, among other terrorist organizations:

At least 50 percent of Hamas's current operating budget of about $10 million a year comes from people in Saudi Arabia, according to estimates by American law enforcement officials, American diplomats in the Middle East and Israeli officials. After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Saudi portion of Hamas financing grew larger as donations from the United States, Europe and other Persian Gulf countries dried up, American officials and analysts said.

Four senior American law enforcement and diplomatic officials who reviewed the document did not dispute its authenticity, but declined to discuss its contents.

(Emphasis added.)