Since NPRI is supposedly in favor of transparency, why do they insist on keeping secret their donors? They're clearly a front group, but for whom? They just won't say. NPRI preaches transparency, but practices opacity.

In Arizona, the state Legislature passed a similar bill, but the bill was vetoed by the Arizona Governor, who is a Republican and an NRA member.

Under current law, a holder of a concealed weapons permit can take their weapon onto a university campus, if they have permission from the university President, who (at UNLV and maybe elsewhere) has delegated that job to the university police.

If this bill passes, anyone with a concealed carry permit can take their weapon onto a university campus even if the university police object!

It's very telling that nobody has the right to take a concealed weapon into the NV legislature. Legislators have exempted themselves from the bill.

Gerrymandering has a very long tradition in this country. The word dates back to 1812. For ages, election districts were drawn to minimize the power of (say) African-Americans. Nobody objected.

In recent decades, some election districts have been drawn to increase the power of racial minorities. Howls of indignation fill the air!

If the Sandoval budget goes through, it will result in elimination of over 500 positions at UNR and UNLV. Thousands of students will not be able to get the courses they want.

No attention should be paid to Patrick Gibbons, an ideologue with the rightwing Nevada Policy Research Institute, which stubbornly refuses to reveal its funding sources.

At the same time that Applied Analysis is cautiously optimistic, Forbes magazine ran an article, "Cities where the economy could get worse". They did not include Las Vegas, but because Las Vegas and Nevada lead the country in foreclosures, they concluded "Although it didn't make our list, Vegas merits watching as a city where the economy could get worse".

Righthaven has sued about two hundred people, demanding $150,000 per defendant. If they won every case, the total would 30 million, and nearly all for one crummy photo...

If a judge looks at the blizzard of lawsuits, amd asks Righthaven, "what makes you think this photo is worth $30 million?" I wonder what their reply would be?????

I don't know why Thomas Friedman is taken as some sort of authority. He can't even understand Arabic.

Like many others in the mainstream media, he promoted the disastrous Iraq war. I see he now claims the the goal of the war was to "bring democracy" to Iraq. Recall that when the war started, the official reason was to seize control of Iraq's nuclear weapons. That was a lie. Iraq had no nuclear weapons.

Friedman claims that Obama inspired the Egyptian uprising. In fact, Obama backed Mubarak until it became clear that Mubarak had outlived his usefulness. The US backed Mubarak for 30 years. And everybody in Egypt knows it.

The Egyptian uprising has its roots in a number of important labor-union struggles in Egypt in recent years. Academics like Stanford's Joel Beinin know about this, but the mainstream media has ignored it.

Friedman has been spectacularly wrong since the start of the Iraq war in 2003, but if you're a pro-war pundit, there are simply no consequences to your career.

Attention readers who are nostalgic for the Tarkanian era....

Back then UNLV played in the Big West conference. UNLV had a strong team in a weak conference. People joked that it was the "Big Worst" conference.

It's different now. We play in a strong conference, that sent three teams to the NCAA tournament. Back in the Tarkanian era, the conference typically sent only one team.

First I was bummed out because the Rebels lost. But then I found out that Righthaven lost a case, and I cheered up immediately.