Check to have links open new windows.

Right wing radio wasted no time in reacting to the 9th Circuit decision delaying (not canceling, mind you, just delaying) the recall election.

New Twist in Recall Brings Anger From Right: "'Clinton comes to town and a day later two of his appointees on the appellate court decide to nix the election,' said Roger Hedgecock, an influential radio personality in San Diego.

'I'm struck by the similarity between California and Venezuela,' Mr. Hedgecock said. 'Last week there was a recall attempt on Chávez down there. The signatures were turned in and his committee throws them out as invalid. That's what you had today. This is the stuff of a banana republic.'"

Nice to see that Bill Clinton still provokes Shock and Awe among the wingers, but look at that second paragraph. Isn't that a beaut? You'd almost think he'd never heard of Bush v. Gore.

"This is definitely a left-wing conspiracy," said Melanie Morgan, the host of the KSFO rush-hour program in San Francisco. "The court has stolen Californians' right to vote. It's partisan, bald-faced theft. We were so close to having this done. I'm exhausted."

A left-wing conspiracy. I wonder who she thinks the conspirators are? And I really wonder how she thinks that delaying the election in order to ensure that votes are counted is "stealing" anyone's right to vote.

And of course, no exploration of the complete lack of any sense of irony on the right would be incomplete without the obligatory Republican Party apparatchik:

"We hoped the court was going to be reasonable and at least pretend to follow the law," said Shawn Steel, former chairman of the California Republican Party and co-founder of the Recall Davis committee. "This decision was brought down by leftist ideologues. It should be apparent to everyone that this court is out of control."

I'd love to hear what he thinks of Bush v. Gore.

Actually, I'm really hoping this one gets appealed to the USSC. It will be interesting to see whether they say that Bush v. Gore has no applicability to this case, basically admitting that they just put Bush in office because they could, or whether they go back on their claim that it created no precedent and apply it here.