“BUT BILLY HAS MARRIED A BOY.” That’s a line in a poem written by the teenaged Abe Lincoln. Read the whole poem in this L.A. Weekly article about the forthcoming book “The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln.”

UPDATE: That’s the L.A. Weekly (not the L.A. Times) as I’ve corrected this post to show.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I pulled this link from the email, but I see Andrew Sullivan linked to it before me, so I feel I owe him a link. He’s predicting a “major controversy” when the book comes out. We’ve seen Lincoln-was-gay research before, but Sullivan may still be right, given the recent greater interest in gay marriage and the apparent depth of the research in the new book.

IF YOU HAD YOUR CHOICE, people of Boston, would you rather see your team win the World Series or your Senator win the Presidency? That’s a question I thought up and posed at a dinner tonight, where the guest of honor was talking about the European Constitution, which is to be signed this Friday. The point was made that the Madison newspapers would probably front-page the story of Kerry and Bruce Springsteen stumping at the Capitol and local shopkeepers steeling themselves for the Halloween festivities over the weekend. Who can explain the mysterious process by which we human beings put things in order of importance?

UPDATE: Alarming News was asking the Red Sox/Kerry question back in September. And also: congratulations, Red Sox!

“JUST A ONE-FINGER VICTORY SALUTE.” Megan’s got the link, two posts down. So am I supposed to dislike him for that? So, he still had a bit of the frat-boy spirit, what, ten years ago? Compare that to film clips of Kerry, deeply — morosely — circumspect, even as a very young man. Sorry, I find Bush attractive in that clip. I see optimism and self-possession.

UPDATE: A reader notes that it’s interesting to compare the part of the Bush clip where he fixes his hair to the well known clip of John Edwards fixing his hair. Bush fixes his hair as if he thinks it’s just a funny little thing to have to do.

PRESIDENT BUSH HAS GOTTEN AROUND TO addressing the missing explosives issue, I’m glad to see. Yesterday, I fretted that Bush’s failure to respond to Kerry on this issue “makes me suspect that the loss either did not pre-date the war or that it isn’t clear whether it did or not.” According to the NYT, Bush had this to say at a campaign stop today in Lancaster, Pennsylvania:

“Our military is now investigating a number of possible scenarios, including that the explosives may have been moved before our troops even arrived at the site … This investigation is important and it’s ongoing, and a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief. After repeatedly calling Iraq the ‘wrong war’ and a ‘diversion,’ Senator Kerry this week seemed shocked to learn that Iraq was a dangerous place full of dangerous weapons.”

Hmmm … well, then my suspicion yesterday was correct. He can’t come out and say clearly that the loss pre-dated the war. The facts we have, as the Times puts it, are:

The stockpile was found to be intact in March 2003, when United Nations weapons inspectors checked it just days before the American-led invasion. On April 10, one day after Saddam Hussein was toppled, American troops visited the Al Qaqaa depot, not finding any big cache of explosives but apparently not looking very closely either.

How close do you have to look to see something that big?

Bush’s line “a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief” interplays nicely with Kerry’s usual criticism of Bush for rushing to war without knowing all the facts.

THE LATEST FROM “ASSAM THE AMERICAN.” Drudge is running his rotating siren effect over this news:

In the last week before the election, ABCNEWS is holding a videotaped message from a purported al Qaeda terrorist warning of a new attack on America, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The terrorist claims on tape the next attack will dwarf 9/11. “The streets will run with blood,” and “America will mourn in silence” because they will be unable to count the number of the dead. Further claims: America has brought this on itself for electing George Bush who has made war on Islam by destroying the Taliban and making war on Al Qaeda. …

The terrorist’s face is concealed by a head dress, and he speaks in an American accent, making it difficult to identify the individual. … The disturbing tape runs an hour — the man simply identifies himself as ‘Assam the American.’

Maybe ABC is holding this story because it’s a piece of junk that it shouldn’t air under any circumstances. I wrote yesterday about the problem of news organizations unethically timing their stories in an attempt to affect the election. There is some reason to speculate that the New York Times and CBS/”60 Minutes” were doing something like that with the al-QaQaa story (though I don’t think it’s at all clear that they did). I think it’s good that bloggers are standing by, monitoring the ethics of MSM. But we bloggers need to be careful not to cry wolf here. Not every withheld story is an outrage. Drudge notes a claim that ABC is holding the tape until Monday night. Does that mean Drudge thinks this tape would help Kerry? As if “Assam the American” would relent if only the nuanced newcomer took office! It seems to me that a more vivid terrorist threat would help Bush.

“I AM DISAPPOINTED TO SEE YOUR HYPER-PARTISAN RAVING ON THE INSTAPUNDIT WEBSITE,” so read the first email I opened after returning from my Civil Procedure class this morning (where I really did rave … about joinder). The second email I opened said “Nice to see an actual moderate coming out of the UW.”

HOW TO CAMPAIGN IN WISCONSIN — EXPLOIT SCHOOLKIDS? Slate takes a close look at campaigning in Wisconsin — especially the way the Republican Party is organized throughout the rural counties and the way the get-out-the-vote effort for Kerry is dominated by independent groups. Don’t I know! Every day I get at least one phone call trying not just to get me to vote but also to get me to join the get-out-the-vote effort. This morning I heard a story on Wisconsin Public Radio about how schoolkids in Milwaukee have been assigned get-out-the-vote work. (The story isn’t up on the WPR website yet, but it will at some point be here.) The Milwaukee Journal is also covering the story. Here’s an excerpt:

Hundreds of public schoolchildren, some as young as 11, are taking time out of regular classes to canvass neighborhoods in Milwaukee, Madison and Racine in a get-out-the-vote effort organized by Wisconsin Citizen Action Fund – a group whose umbrella organization has endorsed John Kerry for president.

The coalition says the effort is non-partisan, but because the group is targeting minority neighborhoods and those with historically low voter turnout – overwhelmingly Democratic areas – Republican operatives are crying foul amid the highly charged political atmosphere in the state.

Kerry and George Bush are virtually tied in recent polls; in 2000, the state’s 10 electoral votes went to the Democrats by 5,708 votes – a margin of two-tenths of one percent of all votes cast.

“They are exploiting schoolchildren on the taxpayers’ dime to conduct what is clearly a Democratic, partisan get-out-the-vote effort,” said Chris Lato, communications director for the Republican Party of Wisconsin. “To spend this time on a clearly partisan effort when these kids should be in school learning is shocking. It’s a disgraceful use of taxpayer money.”

MPS spokeswoman Roseann St. Aubin said the school administration approves of the program as long as children or teachers are not conducting partisan politics on school time and that the curriculum meets the state standards for teaching. The program involves 33 schools in Milwaukee, three high schools in Madison and one high school in Racine.

I firmly believe that once the state compels young people to attend school, deprives them of their freedom, it owes the highest duty to them to use their time only in ways that benefit them. To see them as a source of free labor or to exploit them for any purpose that is not itself a good reason for depriving the young of their freedom is a great wrong.

The various people who promoted and approved of the idea are going with the theory that it is a great “civics lesson.” Well, maybe part of that civics lesson will be kids talking to each other about why the teachers are making them do this, why it’s supposed to be more important than those classroom exercises that the teachers normally think are so worthwhile, whether they are being exploited, and whether the effort is really partisan politics. And why shouldn’t they think such things? They are teenagers, primed to question and rebel against authority. I hope it is a valuable civics lesson that takes on a life of its own in the students’ minds. (Maybe some of them will email me — use my last name followed by @wisc.edu — and give me some inside information.)

UPDATE: An emailer notes the resonance between the program described above and Kerry’s own plan “requiring mandatory [community] service for high school students.” The link is to the Official Kerry-Edwards Blog, which has two links that purport to take you to more information but are, in fact, dead ends. (I note, schoolmarmishly, that “requiring mandatory” is a redundancy. Stay in school and learn some grammar, kids!) Isn’t it interesting that Kerry is the one who tries to scare young people into voting for him by falsely asserting that Bush is inclined to bring back the draft, when he is the one who with a plan — “part of his 100 day plan to change America” — to compel young people into service? Well, I guess if you’re old enough to vote, you’re old enough to escape the compulsion.

UPDATED to correct the name of the newspaper. It’s the Milwaukee Journal, not the Milwaukee State Journal. Milwaukee, I note, is not a state.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Swimming Through the Spin, which blogged the service proposal a few weeks ago, notes that the material the Kerry site seems to have pulled is preserved here:

High School Service Requirement

As President, John Kerry will ensure that every high school student in America performs community service as a requirement for graduation. This service will be a rite of passage for our nation’s youth and will help foster a lifetime of service. States would design service programs that meet their community and educational needs.

The regular Kerry site now has its service proposal here, but it no longer includes mandatory service for high schoolers.

Let me add a lawproffy note: an attempt by the federal government to force states to design and impose these service programs would violate the federalism principle announced by the Supreme Court in Printz v. United States. But maybe Kerry can restock the Supreme Court with new Justices who will do away with all those terrible federalism cases.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader sends this link to Little Green Footballs.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Joanne Jacobs agrees with me that the students are being misused.

DIALOGUE ABOUT “GRAND THEFT AUTO: SAN ANDREAS,” between me and my 21-year old son, Chris:

“The new ‘Grand Theft Auto’ came out.”

“It’s about stealing cars!”

“That’s like saying ‘Super Mario Brothers’ is about collecting coins.”

I’m told to check out Metacritic’s reviews of the game, currently rating the game at 98 out of 100. Too few reviews to make a final call about whether it’s the best rated game ever, but proceed with caution: I’m told the game is “controversial, very violent.”

UPDATE: One of our law students writes:

I have been playing the GTA series since the late 90s, before it went 3-D and became the empire that it is today. I played the last installment, the ultra-violent Vice City, right up until the day I bought San Andreas.

I played San Andreas for about three hours yesterday and I was amazed at how rough it is. Within ten minutes of beginnng the story, I was being assaulted with coarse language, the likes of which are seen only in R-rated films. Shortly there after, I was instructed to kill a crack dealer who was bringing the neighborhood down. I didn’t have a firearm yet, so I beat him to death with a shovel I found behind my house. But the real triumph was when my three buddies and I did a drive-by in rival gang territory. I was the wheelman, and when we got close enough to our target, my buddies leaned out of the car, black bandanas over their faces, and opened fire. The game really captures the gritty life of early-90s Los Angeles (or at least the life that gangsta rap told us existed).

Now, don’t get me wrong, I love the game. But even I was surprised at how violent it is. I expect there to be a lot of controversy over this game, even more so than when Vice City came out.

ANOTHER UPDATE: The student emails that he wouldn’t mind being named. It’s Zachary Wyatt.

I’VE NEVER READ A CODE OF JOURNALISTIC ETHICS, but it seems to me that this much is clear: it is absolutely intolerable for a news organization to hold onto a story for the purpose of breaking it so close to an election as to prevent a fair investigation and response. This story in the L.A. Times indicates that both the New York Times and CBS News/”60 Minutes” learned of the missing explosives story last Wednesday, and each competed against the other to break the story first. This competition is a safeguard that might work better than ethics to protect us from outrageous withholding of stories for the purpose of helping a favored candidate. I hope the L.A. Times story is correct.

Now, I’m watching “Special Report With Brit Hume,” which presents a lengthy report, indicating that the explosives, in all likelihood, went missing before the invasion of Iraq. Hume then sums up: “So, what has recently been learned by the IAEA, which is that these weapons are missing, was something that U.S. weapons inspectors detected in … May of last year.” It seems to me — correct me if I’m wrong — that the Times and “60 Minutes” aren’t to blame for pro-Kerry complicity here. Both tried to break the story quickly once they got the news. It could have been old news, if only the government had released information to this effect earlier. A choice seems to have been made to keep the information under wraps. Now that it has come out and become another basis for saying the aftermath of the war was handled badly there’s a motivation to release the information that the loss of the explosives pre-dates the war. By sitting on the evidence — assuming it is true that the loss precedes the war — the Bush administration took the risk that the story would come out before the election (and close to the election) and that it would be hard to establish the facts about when the explosives disappeared.

Nevertheless, if becomes clear that the loss pre-dated the war, Kerry ought to drop it from his argument that Bush handled the aftermath of the war badly. Or if he doesn’t, assuming it’s true that the loss pre-dates the invasion, Bush ought to fight back and accuse Kerry of relying on bad information. Yet the fact that we aren’t seeing Bush lash back with an accusation like this makes me suspect that the loss either did not pre-date the war or that it isn’t clear whether it did or not. This is a pesky issue to be dealing with so late in the game, but for those already convinced the war was woefully mismanaged, it may not matter that much. Indeed, those who accept the raggedness of the post-war effort and stand by Bush may also not care that much.

UPDATE: Many readers sent me this link to the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. While there is nothing specific it in it about attempting to sway elections, readers have suggested that the most relevant general provision is:

Act Independently

Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.

Frankly, I don’t think that’s good enough. “Obligation” to an “interest” is quite different from sharing someone else’s goals and wanting to help him achieve them.

I find this provision more relevant:

Seek Truth and Report It

Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. …

Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

I still found nothing about the specific strategy of withholding a story and timing its release to affect an election, but it is obviously unethical and implied by the generalities of this code.

THE NEW YORK TIMES WOULD BE FUN TO READ AGAIN. Thomas Maguire, guestblogging over at GlennReynolds.com, shows Bush supporters the upside of a Kerry victory.

ANDREW SULLIVAN HASN’T DECLARED HIS SUPPORT FOR KERRY YET? I asked with some surprise fifteen days ago. It sure seemed obvious already that he was for Kerry. Today, he’s made the official declaration. Of course, he’s for Kerry. His key question about Kerry, back when I expressed surprise that he was still claiming to be undecided was:

[C]an John Kerry be trusted to fight the war on terror? Worrying about this is what keeps me from making the jump to supporting him.

So how well does he answer his own question today?

[Kerry’s] record is undistinguished, and where it stands out, mainly regrettable. He intuitively believes that if a problem exists, it is the government’s job to fix it. He has far too much faith in international institutions, like the corrupt and feckless United Nations, in the tasks of global management. He got the Cold War wrong. He got the first Gulf War wrong. His campaign’s constant and excruciating repositioning on the war against Saddam have been disconcerting, to say the least. I completely understand those who look at this man’s record and deduce that he is simply unfit to fight a war for our survival.

Exactly. So how does Sullivan dig himself back out of that hole? His argument with regard to Iraq is mostly: “There is no alternative to seeing the war through in Iraq.” And he contends that the Democrats ought to have to take responsibility for national security. The notion is that it would be good for everyone if the Democrats had their President so that those who now sit on the sidelines and criticize would have a partisan motivation to support the war. That’s not enough to convince me to abandon my mistrust of Kerry’s commitment to national security. But give Sullivan his due and read the whole thing.

IDEOLOGUE APPRECIATION FOR THE NON-IDEOLOGUE. Somehow I find myself heartily approving.

CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST’S CANCER TREATMENT provokes some thoughts by Dahlia Lithwick over on Slate. She predicts that the Chief Justice “will hang around as long as he possibly can.” Her theory is that he sees his work as unfinished, in part because the “federalism revolution” that “[h]e framed and launched” has “stalled out in recent years.” Court commentators have put a lot of effort into selling the story that the Court is in the midst of “federalism revolution,” an absurd overstatement, considering the handful of cases that recognize some small measure of judicially enforceable reserved power for the states. If you think Chief Justice Rehnquist is fired up about states’ rights, please tell me why he wrote the majority opinion in Nevada v. Hibbs, making the states suable for violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act. He may have “framed and launched” whatever it is the Court has been doing with federalism over the last three decades – surely not a revolution – but if this federalism you envision as some sort of moving vehicle has “stalled,” the Chief Justice himself seems to have been driving when that happened too.

QUESTION BUSH DECLINES TO ANSWER in his interview with Sean Hannity (on “Hannity and Colmes” tonight): “If John Kerry were President, would he make this country more vulnerable, more susceptible to terror attacks?” Bush, perhaps not wanting to have any Cheneyesque harsh words come from his own mouth, says: “That’s ultimately the decision that the people are going to have to decide in this campaign.” To be fair to Bush — and note that I support Bush! — he does go on to list many reasons why Kerry would do a worse job with the war on terrorism, and he does have to be hyper-aware that any given phrase of his might be turned against him, but really, how are we supposed to know the answer to this question better than he does?

UPDATE: Here‘s the transcript.

Wanting to get a feel of THE POLITICAL CLIMATE IN MADISON TODAY, I took a walk down Bascom Hill and up State Street. (You can see the assorted signs of political life in this photo essay on my regular blog.) There’s one poster store on State Street that has long had a near-life-size cardboard cutout photo image of President Bush in its front window, but I noticed today that they now had a matching cutout of John Kerry. Both were selling for $31, and I wondered which one was more popular. I decided to do some direct reporting for Instapundit readers. I went in and asked the young man at the front cash register which one they were selling more of.

“Well, we’ve had the Bush one a lot longer. And you know, this is Madison, so a lot of people are buying the Bush one so they can … you know …”

“What? Do things to it?”

“Umm …”

“But, so, since you’ve gotten the Kerry one, which one is selling more?”

“I hate to say.”

“I’m thinking it might be some indication of who’s going to win the election, don’t you think?”

“I hope not!”

A bit inscrutable, maybe, but I’m thinking the Kerry one isn’t selling well at all. But the poster store guy may have the right interpretation of the sales discrepancy. Don’t we all suspect most of Kerry’s support is antagonism toward Bush? But what are these people doing to those Bush cutouts?

SO WHAT’S EARLY VOTING LIKE IN MADISON, WISCONSIN? The Badger Herald has this:

The effort to get students to vote early is being promoted by the College Democrats, who have chartered a shuttle to run between the Memorial Union and City Hall every weekday until the election. The van, which runs every half hour between 11 a.m. and 3 p.m., is being funded by the Democratic National Committee, who pledged the money after being impressed by the field operation in Madison.

My 21-year-old son, Chris stopped by City Hall to vote, and he had this to say:

“No one ever asked for my ID, and in fact, I asked two different people if they wanted to see my ID, and they said no. So, anyone who wanted to could go in and write down somebody else’s name if they knew their address, and vote for them.”

Wouldn’t want to hassle anybody and make them feel all disenfranchised now, would you?

The Washington Post has come out with the winners of its 2004 BEST BLOGS READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS, and it’s nice to see that Instapundit won “Best Outside the Beltway” and “Most Likely to Last Beyond Election Day.” Congratulations, Glenn. Interesting that The Corner won both “Best Democratic Party Coverage” and “Best Republican Party Coverage” (as well as two other awards).

Let me extend good wishes for a SPEEDY RECOVERY TO CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST, who has been hospitalized for treatment of thyroid cancer. I learned the news from a journalist’s phone call, which came the instant I opened the door upon returning from class this morning. The journalist’s question was, not surprisingly, what effect will this have on the presidential election? It strikes me as a bit unseemly to turn from the news of an individual’s illness immediately to the election. Everything must be about the election. Yet I duly offered my big array of speculations about the Court, the delicacy of using this event to focus attention on who Kerry and Bush might nominate, and how voters might tip if this backburner issue is moved to the forefront.

WHAT TO WEAR? HOW TO ACT? Gordon Smith has lots of good advice for law professor candidates facing the quickie interviews coming up in Washington, D.C. For example, when they ask you why you want to be a lawprof, don’t say, “Because I hate practicing law” or “Because I wanted more free time.”

OUR POLISH-BORN LAWPROF, Nina Camic, has been counting down the days to the American election, in her inimitable, discursive, digressive style. Each day in the countdown is represented by a New York street. You can start at today’s 9th Street and then scroll down into the past for more of her lovely — and passionately pro-Kerry — writings and photographs.

UPDATE: Here, Nina answers email generated by this link, including the question, as rephrased by Nina: “how I could possibly be Polish, with a first-hand knowledge of socialism and not be a conservative?”

“THERE IS ONE WHO CAN DIVIDE THE RED SEA FOR US.” That would be John Kerry, as campaign rhetoric is laid on extra-thick and extra-shamelessly for black voters.

“THROUGH CHAT, Kerry hopes to reduce terror to a ‘nuisance,'”: The Wisconsin State Journal endorses President Bush.

WOW, IT LOOKS BIG OVER HERE. Thanks to Glenn — whom I’ve never met, though we both inhabit lawprofdom — for inviting me over. Nonvirtually, I’m in Wisconsin, a battleground state, as daily, nagging phone calls would remind me even if I never read or watched the news. Would you think there was any yet-untapped niche of Wisconsin voters? The Wisconsin State Journal found one.

UPDATE: Unfortunately, the WSJ took the article I had linked down. The story was about the Amish, who tend not to vote, for reasons explained in the article. I’ve found brief mentions, such as here, of efforts by Republicans to push the Amish to vote. The linked article was a long piece, which interviewed a number of Amish in Wisconsin, some of whom said they would vote for Kerry if they voted. (The usual assumption is that the Amish would take a conservative political position.)