Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse: Anthony Weiner wanted to do a threesome — with another guy.
[Update a few minutes later]
More thoughts from Ace. All I can say is eeeeeeeuuuuuuuwwwww. And TMI.
You know what, though? After watching the slime for years, none of this really surprises me.
OT: A legal challenge to California’s Prop. 13.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-newton-prop13-20111226,0,6291525.column
It does seem an odd challenge. Presumably this very issue had to be decided way back when Proposition 13 first passed. Apparently the contemporary challenge stems from a ruling on Proposition 8, which prohibited same sex marriage. If I understand correctly, the argument seems to be that since 13 had a profound impact on the power of the State legislature, it should be treated, after the fact, as a revision, even if it was treated as an amendment (as the story states, a revision is a more substantial change than an amendment).
I gather the analogous situation with Proposition 8, is that suppose the ban on same sex marriage were at some future point found to have changed the balance of power in the legislature. Then one could claim that it was actually a revision even though a court had earlier ruled it an amendment.
My guess is that opponents of Proposition 13 are trying any way possible to overturn Proposition 13. My view is that if they couldn’t muster even a simple majority on a ballot initiative (since reversing Proposition 13 would be an amendment requiring a simple majority just like the original), then they shouldn’t be able to via a convenient and many decades delayed reinterpretation of what sort of constitutional change it was.
Thanks, Rand. Pass the mental floss, please.