That's old hat. A couple of weeks ago I was looking at the schedule for the graduation ceremonies at the University of Michigan and I learned that a special ceremony exclusively for African American graduates was one of the events on the list. I imagine such things are at many public universities.

I have to be careful. David Brooks is a smart guy and makes some good points sometimes. But when he resorts to his usual "moderate" ticks, my blood starts boiling.

The most ridiculous tick is whenever he invests a precious paragraph or two in a column to remind us how hard-working and conscientious government bureaucrats are, and how unfair is the reflexive conservative distrust of such people. I guess now, with the news from the IRS, we're learning that a conservative has to be pretty paranoid indeed to be more suspicious than is warranted.

I think Lenin gave the game away that time he scratched a swastika on his forehead.

Based on the chair he's sitting in, I'm guessing that photo of Lenin is post-stroke. Peter, can you confirm or deny? If so, I'd say it's not terribly representative and would account for the "lights-on-nobody-home" look that Percival described.

Plus, I think the goatee is implicated.

But, but . . . .

He never raises his voice.

He's so reasonable.

He must be in the middle because everyone in Washington agrees with him.

He's a master of the Brezhnev doctrine ("what's mine is mine, and what's yours is negotiable"). See that? See that? He's willing to negotiate.

How narcissistic and tunnel-visioned do you have to be to assert that divorce increases human happiness? I guess, in the person of Jack Persico, we have an answer to that question.

Nathan, I completely agree. In that way, the global warming narrative is the latest in a string of enthusiasms which include the overpopulation scare of the 70s and 80s, and the peak oil scare of the 00s. Both movements raised legitimate points that statist maniacs spun into scary scenarios that always extrapolated from trends that were not fated to continue forever and used selectively-culled data to assume the worst.

And always, it was the character of ordinary people about which the worst was assumed. There's a deep misanthropy at work in all these cases.

In my tribe the rite involves eating two gallons of ice cream in one sitting.

I also question the safety of dumping hormones into your system. What kind of testing did this receive? What is the recommended limit for resorting to this medication. . .and do we know how young women use it in the real world? As someone who came extremely close to losing a wife to breast cancer (with birth control possibly implicated), I can assure you this is not a trivial question.

Yes to the FDA. My understanding is that birth control pills prevent ovulation, but also alter the uterine lining so implantation is less likely. If you're using the pill very faithfully as directed, you are extremely unlikely to cause an abortion (because, no ovulation). Take it irregularly, and the risk goes up. Based on that I have to believe Plan B produces abortions some of the time.

I hate to contradict a doctor but I believe Joseph Paquette's initial statement is not precise.

UPDATE: Oops, I missed part of the thread. 3rd angle projection covered this first, and seems to confirm my understanding.

Ha! Or rather, hä!

Fun stuff, John H, but you know, in the same spirit as this post, one attribute of intelligence is . . . editing. Just saying.

Actually, I think I need to keep following the guy. It looks like I've been more insular than the rest of you.

Plus, there have been New Developments. Today he raging that the UK government's multi-billion £ Universal Credit system only works on Windows XP and Explorer 6, and he's threatening to become a libertarian. He's getting mugged by reality and there's hope for him yet!

Add that to the record books: the liberals of NY have discovered breasts.

(Dang time machine! Forgot to turn it off again.)

No? You mean, don't unfollow and don't reply?