The Ass. Press reports that Congress is considering a bill to extend Daylight Savings Time by more than a little over a month. Demonstrating its unusual math skills, they write:

Lawmakers crafting energy legislation approved an amendment Wednesday to extend daylight-saving time by two months, having it start on the last Sunday in March and end on the last Sunday in November.

Apparently, for the Ass. Press, the one-week period between the last Sunday in March and the first week of April counts as a month. As to why anyone would want this two-month five week extension, proponent Fred Upton (R-Mich.) nonexplained that:

“Extending daylight-saving time makes sense, especially with skyrocketing energy costs.”

Which it does how, exactly? By making people turn off their lights one hour earlier at night, just so they can get up an hour early and have to turn on their lights before dawn? Maybe this trade-off does result in a net savings, but it’s not exactly clear how, and it would be nice if they’d elaborate a bit as to what else it entails, particularly in late November, when the sun doesn’t come up all that early as it is.

Meanwhile, the bill’s other sponsor, Ed Markey (D[u]-M[b]ass), appears to be unclear on the very concept of what the misnamed “Daylight Savings” actually does. Apparently, he thinks it’s not about time shifting at all, but about actually saving daylight:

The more daylight we have, the less electricity we use.

Silly me, I never knew that having more daylight was an option. In that case, why stop with one hour for most of the year, when we could just as easily vote to give ourselves four hours year-round? More daylight for all!

UPDATE: Boifromtroy beat me to the punch.

UPDATE x2: Sunday’s Weekend Live reported that the proposal would have Daylight “Savings” Time begin on the first Sunday of March, not the last. In which case, the Ass. Press got the dates wrong and miscalculated the time between their wrong dates, but ended up computing the right amount of time as a result of these two boners. Who said two wrongs don’t make a right?

Meet Mae Margourik. Like Terri Schiavo, she’s being starved to death by a court order. Unlike Terri Schiavo, however, she actually left a living will clarifying she did not wish to be starved under the circumstances. Also unlike Terri, all this is happening because an idiot judge who doesn’t even have a law degree appointed a guardian who isn’t even her next of kin. More here.

Thanks to Steve Sturm for the link.

UPDATE: There may be more (or less) than meets the eye. Stay tuned.