But is linking Brian Sandoval to Sharron Angle a stretch, or a slur? Surely Sandoval has not endorsed some of the more radical ideas Angle has touted on the campaign trail, such as eliminating the U.S. Department of Education.

Yet, Sandoval did endorse Angle, and he did it after her views on the Education Department were well known. The endorsement came in late July on Face to Face with Jon Ralston, where Sandoval said “I support Sharron Angle’s candidacy.”

Now, Sandoval didn’t have to back Angle. He could have said something along these lines: “Sharron’s got her race to run, and I have mine. She doesn’t need my help or advice, and I am certainly focused on beating Rory Reid for governor.”

Yes, he might have taken some grief from Republicans for failing to show “unity.” Yes, he might have irritated some Reid haters, for failing to reflexively bash the senior senator. But ultimately, most Republicans would have understood if Sandoval refused to say he supported Angle, who is clearly farther to the right than almost any other Nevada politician.

Sandoval might even have said he was staying out of the race out of respect and gratitude for Reid, who nominated him for the federal bench, a post Sandoval left to run against Reid’s son. Of course, that would not have endeared him to the Reid haters.

Instead, made a political calculus Sandoval spoke up to say he supports Angle, despite her remarks about the education department, transitioning out of Social Security and Medicare, coming out against unemployment benefits, opposing abortion in all cases, even rape and incest and turning to “Second Amendment remedies” in the event voters don’t change Congress.

And it’s not like Sandoval was unaware of Angle’s character; he was, after all, the attorney general who fought Angle’s 2003 federal lawsuit that sought to overturn the infamous Guinn v. Legislature decision.

But Sandoval endorsed her anyway. And that means, to a certain extend, he’s bought into her baggage, and linking the would-be governor to the would-be senator isn’t an outrageous proposition. Call it the price he’ll pay for Republican unity.

And, speaking of Angle, she’s got a link on her page to a group called NRA members for Sharron Angle, which aims to prevent an NRA endorsement of Reid with a petition, and a reminder that the more conservative gun group — Gun Owners of America — gives Reid an F rating on his legislative record.

In a 2009 radio interview with Bill Manders, released today by the Harry Reid campaign, the host allowed that there were “home born, homegrown enemies” of the nation, “And I for one think we have some of those enemies in the walls of the Senate and the Congress.”

“Yes, I think you’re right, Bill,” Angle replied.

Really? There are enemies in the walls of the Senate and Congress? (Technically, I should note that “Congress” is the word we collectively use to refer to the Senate and the House, so Manders likely meant to say “House” there, but who can really know?)

Anyway, I sent an e-mail asking if Angle would please list those “domestic enemies” for this blog. Here’s what I got back from Angle’s director of communications, Jarrod Agen:

This is literally an example of people trying to put words in Sharron’s mouth. Sharron agrees that elected officials solemnly swear to support, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies domestic or foreign, and that they will bear true faith, allegiance and loyalty. It’s pretty weak for Harry Reid, who famously went on national television and told our the troops that the “war is lost,” to now try and attack Sharron for saying ‘yes’ in a radio interview.”

OK, just for a second, I have to note how totally awesome it would have been if Agen had instead responded to my e-mail by saying, “Um, yeah, Steve, it’s Harry Reid. He’s the domestic enemy.” That would have been sweet. But you’ve got to work with what you get, so…

It should be noted that the actual oath senators take is this:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

It should be further noted that a failure to uphold the oath — essentially abandoning one’s duty to support and defend the Constitution against its enemies — is akin to giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, which as we all know is the constitutional definition of treason.

Which brings us to the fact that Angle didn’t just say “yes,” as Agen asserts; she said she agrees with Manders that enemies of the United States lurk “in the walls” of the Senate and the Congress. She didn’t mean termites, people. She meant traitors. And that’s still a pretty serious charge.

Again, how totally awesome would it have been if Angle had the courage of her convictions, and said that yes, she believes Reid has committed treason by failing to follow the Constitution, and went on to detail evidence of those failures. Because then we could get ourselves a good debate going on what the Constitution means today.

Sadly, we won’t have that. Oh, well, back to work.

UPDATE: Asked about the 2009 comment on a local talk show host Thursday, Angle refused to back down.

As some of you readers may know, Reid recently came out against the building of a mosque not far from Ground Zero in New York City, breaking ranks with President Barack Obama, who said recently at a White House dinner held to honor the Muslim holy month of Ramadan that the mosque should be allowed to go forward, out of respect for freedom of religion. It’s sadly left to cynical pundits such as myself to wonder how freedom of religion can at once be used to justify a zoning decision in New York City while at the same time never raising the perfectly rational question: Why is there a dinner to honor any religious holiday held at the White House?)

(BTW, for a more principled defense of the idea of the mosque, read Christopher Hitchens‘s brief essay on Slate.)

Reid’s defiance of Obama on the issue puts him squarely within the Republican mainstream, including the reported views of Sharron Angle, his GOP opponent, who apparently believes the mosque idea is offensive to the families of Sept. 11 victims. But if you thought a rare bit of agreement would forge at least a one-day truce, you haven’t been following along. The National Republican Senatorial Committee’s ever-vigilant spokesman Brian Walsh dispatched this subject-changing statement:

While it’s commendable that Senator Reid now agrees with Republican Sharron Angle that we should respect the wishes of 9/11 families, it’s regrettable that he hasn’t demonstrated this same independence from President Obama on the critical issues facing America during the last 19 months. Whether it was his backroom deal-making during the health care debate or his decision to ram the stimulus boondoggle into law, Harry Reid has consistently stood up for the liberal elite’s agenda in Washington instead of for taxpayers in Nevada. Under his watch as the Democrat Senate Leader, Nevada’s unemployment has skyrocketed to 14.2 percent, while families and small businesses face the prospect of the largest tax increase in American history at the end of the year. It’s clear that Harry Reid recognizes the desperate political straits he’s facing with the election less than 90 days away, but his positioning on this issue fools no one.

Almost perfect, save for two things. One, if it’s “commendable” that Reid agrees with Angle, how can it be “desperate” and “positioning” just four sentences later? Is Walsh really saying that Reid is prostituting his real feelings for cheap political gain? Shocking, but very possibly true. Which brings us to this point: It’s actually not commendable to make decisions of this nature based on people’s feelings, because — as Hitchens notes above — this is precisely the argument that Islamic fascists use when threatening violence against those who “offend” their faith.

Perhaps Reid will take from this a lesson, one useful for all Democrats: Republicans want to win in November, and they give no quarter in the fight to do so. Acquiescence, even if it is heartfelt, is just another weapon to be turned against you.

UPDATE: Now comes word that the mosque may actually be moved from the site because of the controversy.

UPDATE 2: Further evidence, as if any were needed, that Reid is wrong on this issue. (Also evidence that feeling-based decision making and guilt-by-association are alive and well.)

I join Nevada’s students and their parents in being disappointed with Governor Gibbons and his severe lack of leadership in education. While governors from other states were aggressively working to pass new reform laws and position their states to take advantage of these important funds, our governor was satisfied with only meeting the minimum requirement to file our application. His delay in addressing Nevada’s eligibility prevented the state from submitting an application for the first round of funding. Nearly each of the states named as finalists today were able to get important feedback on their proposals, which ultimately strengthened their second round effort.

I commend the work of the blue ribbon panel for doing so much with so little to put together the state’s proposal and develop a strong plan to reform education in Nevada. It’s unfortunate that their effort has to fall victim to the governor’s lack of leadership. I remain strongly supportive of Nevada’s education reform proposal and will continue working with state leaders to help implement these reforms and better position Nevada to take advantage of Race to the Top and other competitive, matching funds.

As you can well imagine, that didn’t sit well with Gibbons, whose office returned fire with a campaign-style news release of its own. The text:

Once again, Harry Reid has failed Nevada. Reid has never lifted a finger to help us while we applied for these special federal funds for education. Harry Reid was asleep at the switch again when the teachers, parents, children and families of Nevada needed his help.

Senator Reid often brags about the work he has done for Nevada, but his dismal track record tells a different story. Harry Reid failed to get our state adequate stimulus funds, Harry Reid continues to fail to help Nevada families during our time of high unemployment, Harry Reid continues to fail to help Nevada families climb out of the economic crisis, and Harry Reid continues to fail Nevada families by purposely avoiding any effort to assist the Nevada Education Reform Blue Ribbon Task Force. Harry Reid truly has lost touch with Nevada.

I want to apologize, on behalf of Harry Reid, to Nevada Education Reform Blue Ribbon Task Force Co-Chairs Elaine Wynn and Nevada State Higher Education Chancellor Dan Klaich. Harry Reid’s remarks are an insult to both of these fine leaders and to all the rest of the Task Force members who are working hard to improve education in Nevada.

Harry Reid spends so much energy genuflecting before the Obama administration and carrying out this administration’s policies that are destined for failure. Harry Reid should be fighting for Nevada, instead he is working in Washington DC as a “gopher” for the Obama Administration and has again turned his back on Nevada families.

This is just another example of why Nevadans cannot count on Harry Reid to represent them.

Quick question: If the Obama administration’s policies are destined for failure, and Race to the Top is one of the Obama administration’s policies, then isn’t Race to the Top destined for failure? And if so, why is Gibbons so angry about Reid’s alleged failure to help Nevada take advantage of a policy destined for failure? Just asking.

Who’s right, here? Well, Reid couldn’t really help Nevada with an application once the criteria for applying for funds was set. And it’s likely Nevada’s own education funding — never anywhere close to the middle, much less the top — played a role in this, as matching funds do in so many other cases. States have to spend money in order to get money, as we all know. Bottom line: The state could really have used this money, no matter who’s really at fault for failing to get it.

Speaking of an infamous “non-aggression pact” between him and U.S. Sen. Harry Reid that’s been in place for more than a decade, Ensign claimed he didn’t violate that agreement when he called former Congresswoman Barbara Vucanovich and urged her to support Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle, because, “We need to beat Harry Reid.”

Here’s an excerpt from a blog posted by Steve Tetreault:

“I didn’t say anything, even in the private conversation,” Ensign said. “I never criticized him. I don’t criticize Senator Reid and I did not criticize him then.”

“As a matter of fact, I said positive things about Senator Reid in that conversation with Barbara,” Ensign said. “I just said his party is doing damage to our country.”

Oh, to be able to listen to those phone calls instead of the ones in which Mel Gibson demonstrates how he’s still the worst human being on the planet. Can you imagine how that conversation went?

“Hey, Barbara, it’s John Ensign calling. No, sure, I understand you’re married. Right, but … I’m not calling about that … OK, but seriously … even if I was the LAST man on earth? Now you’re not even serious. OK, but … all right, but what I’m really calling about is Harry Reid. You know, Reid’s a great guy and I really like him as a person, but he’s the head of a party that’s screwing our country like … well, I probably shouldn’t have used that phrase. OK, anyway, well, this is awkward. Anyway, they’re really bad and could you please support Sharron Angle? Thanks, bye.”

Although Reid has been criticized plenty — including by yours truly — for failing to help Ensign opponents Ed Bernstein (2000) and Jack Carter (2006), and Reid foe Richard Ziser (2004) was so bad he actually lost in the primary to “none of these candidates” in several rural counties and thus posed no real threat to Reid, Ensign maintained getting involved in the first real race Reid has had since their infamous 1998 matchup is fair game.

“I am just campaigning for his opponent,” Ensign said. “That is okay to do. That is part of the agreement and has been from the beginning.”

Does anybody have this agreement in writing? I’d love to see that.

Lowden was quoted by the Nevada News Bureau saying that campaign incidents such as bartergate were exaggerated by Reid to harm her campaign.

First, that’s a little thing called “politics,” of which Reid is a formidable practitioner.

But second, that’s just plain wrong.

Yes, Reid’s campaign — in the form of its wholly owned subsidiary, the Nevada State Democratic Party — did send a staffer with a goat to Lowden’s campaign headquarters as a prank.

But it was Lowden herself — speaking on Nevada Newsmakers April 19 — who really dug in a bunker on Mt. Barter, declaring that in the olden days our grandparents took chickens to doctors.

From there, it was off to the races, with national mockery that ranged from Keith Olbermann to Jay Leno.

It was shortly after bartergate began in earnest that Lowden sank in the polls:  She was at 45 percent in April, according to the Review-Journal poll, but fell to 30 percent in a poll published May 13, a drop of 15 points. She fell another 7 percent from May 28 to June 6, the R-J poll indicates.

Meanwhile, her conservative, Tea Party Express-endorsed rival Sharron Angle, who posted a mere 5 percent in April, skyrocketed to 29 percent in late May and is now in first place with 32 percent, the R-J poll says. That’s due largely to her backing by the Tea Party Express — not to mention the money that came with it, and an associated endorsement from the Club for Growth.

But no analysis of Angle’s rise and Lowden’s fall is complete without a healthy dose of blame going not to Harry Reid, but to Sue Lowden herself.

The letter refers to a 1977 incident in which the state Gaming Control Board had recommended against the sale of the Hacienda hotel-casino to Paul Lowden, citing fears that “third parties” could have an “undisclosed interest” in the property. (Translated: There may have been some mobsters involved in the deal.) But Reid — then chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission — disputed the results of the Gaming Control Board’s investigation, and the commission voted unanimously to approve the sale nevertheless.

Later, the incident became an issue when the Lowdens sought to be involved in an Illinois casino deal. Given that they were big supporters of Reid, why wouldn’t the senator vouch for them? And vouch he did.

“In the years that have followed, I have come to know Paul Lowden personally,” Reid wrote to Illinois gaming regulators. “I have also become acquainted with his wife, Sue. I have found them to be great assets to the state, and I have found them to be honest in all their dealings with me. I highly recommend Paul Lowden and his company.”

Hmmmm. Wonder if Reid’s changed his mind since then?

Here’s the full letter, for your reading pleasure:

Only this time, he’s an Arab guy who traffics in slave labor, and he really loves Harry Reid.

A new pair of anti-Reid television ads running on KTNV Channel 13 link Reid to Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, prime minister and vice president of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of Dubai.

Like the Willie Horton ad, this one features the visage of a dark-skinned person whom we’re told we should fear. And like the Willie Horton ad, it’s designed to appeal to our prejudices.

The backstory: MGM Mirage is partners with Dubai World, a state-owned company, in CityCenter. That project was in danger of failing, and Reid called banks on behalf of MGM Mirage, asking them to speak with CEO Jim Murren. That intervention helped CityCenter avoid bankruptcy, and saved thousands of jobs in Las Vegas. Murren said as much in an ad cut for Reid that credits the senior senator with helping save the project.

But the producers of the ad — Floyd Brown, who produced the original Willie Horton ad in 1988, and Gary Kreep, chairman of the Republican Majority Campaign PAC — say that since Sheikh Al Maktoum allegedly used slave labor to build some of the massive buildings in Dubai, and since Dubai World is a partner in CityCenter, and since Reid helped CityCenter, and since Murren cut an ad for Reid and since MGM is the largest donor to Reid’s campaign, according to Open Secrets.org, then Reid must be connected to slave labor.

“Both the slave bosses and the union bosses want Harry Reid re-elected. Go figure,” one of the ads says.

Talk about a stretch. Is this ad about Harry Reid or Reed Richards?

MGM Mirage isn’t taking the matter lightly. In a letter signed by attorney Frank Schreck, the company tells Brown and Kreep that the allegations (in the ad and an accompanying news release, which referred to Reid, Murren and Al Maktoum as a “corrupt triumvirate”) are false, and that they could be sued if they don’t pull the ads and correct the record.

Kreep said the central thrust of the ad was to tie Reid to slave labor, but also to point out how MGM Mirage doesn’t pay for gambling license investigations. He noted that the industry refused during the recent special session to pay a requested $32 million to the state to cover the cost of regulation.

But the thing is, the gambling industry does pay the cost of its investigations. Kreep pointed to one gambling industry regulation that says applicants aren’t required to pay for the cost of investigations, but a quick reading shows that regulation actually applies to people who do business on casino premises. And since gambling industry taxes pay for nearly half of the state’s general fund, skipping out on taxes is a tough argument to make.

But isn’t it curious that conservatives seeking to oust the Democratic majority leader are attacking him and a private-sector company (the state’s largest private employer) … for not paying enough in taxes? When did the right-wingers turn into Joe Neal?

And while Reid may have helped CityCenter maintain its financing, and may have benefitted from donations, there’s nothing to suggest he supports slave labor. The jobs he helped save in Las Vegas were union jobs, and a company hit hard by recession and unemployment is understandably grateful.

But isn’t it interesting to see the lengths to which the right will go to torpedo Harry Reid?