Of course, conservatives always claim to be against judicial activism.

In any event, the proper question isn't what a journalist thinks is relevant but what his or her audience thinks is relevant. Denying people information they would find useful because you think they shouldn't find it useful is censorship, not journalism.

There is a deadening conformity in the culture of cyberspace in which we don't intend to participate.

It wouldn't be fair to say that conservatives cherish property the way liberals cherish equality. But it would be fair to say that the takings clause is the conservatives recipe for judicial activism just as they say liberals have misused the equal protection clause.

One answer is that the towns elected officials thought that the project served a public purpose and that the various subsidies and favors were worth the price. But they may or may not have thought this.

So the danger of conservative judicial activism has been averted for another year. Stay tuned.

A gaffe is a politician inadvertently telling an inconvenient truth.