Perhaps this is paranoia getting the best of me, but in the mole's first post on Gawker after being let go, he ended it with this foreboding message: "Stay tuned for much, much more tomorrow." It could just be another case of his bark being worse than his bite, but my biggest concern is that he'll make up stories and not be asked to validate them by the rest of the media.

Nevertheless, it's been an unimpressive run thus far for a self-anointed "mole." Who knows? Maybe, just to add to the whole mystery and secretiveness, he's actually a planted Romney backer posing as a Gawker mole by posing as a Fox News employee!

Unlike Xavier, Minnesota is expanding its coverage on contraceptives to those outside of the university's policy.

Even if we were pull this away from a religious freedom argument and make this purely an economic debate, in just a couple paragraphs, here's why this sort of coverage is financially unfeasible:

The new policy won’t cover oral contraceptives because of their popularity, said Dave Golden, a Boynton [Health Services] spokesman.

Pharmaceutical prices at Boynton are fixed to keep it affordable for students, so allowing students to obtain pills from out-of-network pharmacies would increase the overall cost of the plan, he said.

And:

According to Boynton’s 2010 College Student Health Survey, about 43.7 percent of respondents who use contraceptives use birth control pills...

“It’s very frequently prescribed, and that could just run the cost of the plan out of sight,” he said.

The article later quotes three female students parroting Fluke -“a burden having to pay out-of-pocket for it” - but this is my favorite:

“Students are here to learn,” she said. “They’re not here to start families right now.”

Here to learn? Then why do you need birth control to begin with?

Back in high school, I remember going multiple Fridays during Lent without eating lunch because the cafeteria didn't provide any non-meat options, even after bringing it to the attention of the administration. Heck, we even had a whole outdoor barbecue on Good Friday one year!

It's just interesting to see what "observances" are acknowledged by progressives, and what get nothing more than an eye roll.

Another element to this is the Spanish language itself. Currently, it's the language of a politically significant minority (which is quickly becoming anything but a "minority") and therefore more understandable to hear so publicly. I wonder how everyone would react though were a politician to speak to constituents in a language not as common as Spanish.

For example, my district in Minnesota is represented by Keith Ellison, and includes significant portions of Somalian immigrants. Let's say he knew Somali, and gave a speech exclusively in that language - there would probably be a much different reaction than Rubio doing so in Spanish, including from our side admittedly.

Yet, it would still be consistent with Derbyshire's point: having a common tongue allows for immigrants to feel more like a part of a unified country, rather than just interest groups only select politicians can reach out to. Again, great thought-provoking post.

This is a great post, so thanks for sharing.

Speaking more broadly about how the Rubio pick would just be seen as "pandering," Ann Coulter brought up similar points about all this on "The Factor" the other night; she seemed to believe that the GOP would essentially be selling out just to get a voting bloc. But is merely speaking a language other than English still "pandering?"

I recognize that Derbyshire is making a slightly different point than that though; it's more than just pandering, but damaging to the unification process of the country as a whole.

With my mom's entire side of the family born, raised, and living in Guatemala, my first reaction whenever I hear Rubio speak Spanish is that "Cool, I can understand it," and it's appealing in a way that very few politicians - or public figures for that matter - could achieve. After reading Derbyshire's reaction though, I'm rethinking if that's what Rubio should be doing. He no doubt uniquely connects with Spanish-speaking voters by doing so, especially those that don't know English, but does it also limit assimilation?

No conclusions here; your post just really got me thinking :)

On the topic of glitter bombing, and any other means of disruptive, attention-grabbing activist stunts, here's a column I wrote about a month ago for my campus paper about that. We had an epidemic of episodes leading up to the Minnesota caucuses. 

Thanks, CuriousJohn - glad you liked it.

I agree with your post in the Members Feed: these data should be in every newspaper and broadcast. Yet, the only time we'll hear about Wisconsin's budget reforms will be in regards to the upcoming recall election and Walker's "attack" on unions. 

What timing - I just happened to post this video on my Facebook page on Friday.

I've had this video in the virtual vault for a while now, and I try to post it whenever it seems pertinent to whatever the main subject of debate is.

In my mind, they're like advertisements or billboards: for the most part, they're annoying and obtrusive, but every once in a while there's one that I can't help but smirk and appreciate its cleverness.

I do agree that there's been a bit of an overload though. They remind me of when Facebook went through its bumper stickers phase a few years ago, so maybe this will be another flash-in-the-pan fad that will only occasionally pop up down the road.

I wonder how much of the administration's recent assault on the Catholic Church propelled Santorum to victory last night. I haven't seen the demographic breakdown, but it may not be such a coincidence that a Catholic candidate did so well after the week of news about the potential loss of religious freedom for the Church; Catholics may have come out in full force to support "their guy."

Like I said, I have no hard data that suggests that is ultimately the case, but just as I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up yet, I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

I know a couple of people that were in this actually - they had a lot of fun making it!

Unfortunately, I'm hesitant to interpret Kim Jong-il's death as a means of liberation for North Korea. That wasn't the case when he succeeded his father, nor does it necessarily mean it will be when his son succeeds him.

On that note though, my understand was that Jong-il's brother-in-law, Chang Sung-taek, had his eyes on the "throne," if I may call it that, which could result in an ugly power struggle if the population is split between loyalty to the Kim dynasty, supporters of Chang, and liberation activists. According to a quick Wikipedia check:

He is a leading figure in the North Korean government, and South Korean government officials and academic North Korea watchers suggested that he may have taken on de facto leadership over North Korea due to Kim Jong-il's ill health.

In my opinion, college students should have a pretty solid grasp how to write by the time they enroll, not learning how to do so when they get there. Unfortunately though, that's not necessarily the reality.

My high school spent a lot of time focusing on writing, and while I almost thought it was too much at the time, I'm grateful for it now. When I read a lot of my classmates' works, I'm often times taken aback by some basic composition skills that their works lack. I don't mean to sound hoity-toity by saying that, but there is a significant disparity between where I expected the standard of writing to be among my peers and where it actually is.

Perhaps my sample size is too small to base that off of, but I think my point remains: college students should already know how to write before they set foot on campus. They don't need to be the next great American essayist or novelist, but have enough of a foundation to structure an argument using correct grammar and a diverse vocabulary.

*Crossing my fingers that this comment I just wrote meets that standard :)*

Turns out Robert posted the picture as I was typing up my comment, so nevermind, King Prawn. Thanks!

If you have a link to this picture, that'd be great! I'd love to see it!

As soon as I heard the media, professors, and classmates comparing Occupy Wall Street to the Tea Party, the first question that came to my mind was why they were so eager and intent to compare the movement to one that they've badmouthed for two years.

They're basically saying "You know that thing that you have that we've called stupid and obnoxious? Well, we now have one too!" It's not even an issue of supporting one group or the other, but that the reasoning is inconsistent.

There are a few of these videos out there surrounding GOP members, like Newt, Bachmann, and Pawlenty, and most happen to take place here in the Twin Cities for whatever reason.

I remember James making a passing comment about these  in a podcast over the summer. I don't remember his exact phrasing, but he essentially pointed out the hypocrisy of these activists, who claim to be combating intolerance, but doing so by being equally intolerant.