Not a direct response to your question but ---. As you know for sure, in the US there are less than half the Jesuits we had in 1960. And most of the remaining are old men. So there aren't enough Jesuits to go around. I've come to the conclusion that they should get out of the college biz and concentrate their efforts on high school. I'm trying to help that along by making no more contributions to my college alma mater in Denver. Go Cristo Rey!

The Church thruout history has had trouble figuring out whether it was better to be with 'em or agin 'em. It's awfully fine having your snoot in a government's trough. Georgetown over time has become a creature of DC; ie, they're with 'em. ND has decided not.

The commenter who says “look how well the amnesty of 1986 worked” is ignoring a fundamental change. In those olden days, there was no practical way for an employer to check an applicant’s eligibility for employment. It would have required an army of government bureaucrats and a LOT of waiting time for employer and applicant. Today there are computers, the internet and databases linked together in the e-verify system. It ain’t perfect but it can be made to work.

1. Illegal immigration and illegal aliens are festering problems that will go on ad infinitum if the country doesn’t get a grasp. That can’t be good for us. And lack of action is de facto amnesty.
2. Think, for example, about an illegal alien who’s been in the country since right after the last amnesty, that is for about 25 years. Think further that this person has broken no laws other than those related to his immigration status. No matter how you cut it, there is no way in heck that the US is going to adopt a policy that says this person has to go home. To think that such a thing could happen is a delusion and does nothing other than allowing the festering to continue.

To be continued.

 Where can I buy it?

OTOH, I guess I'm sort of a Grover Norquist kind of guy; ie, we simply can't give this gov't any more money to blow. And we can't let the lefties know that we can be rolled on this; they'll learn the lesson that we're easy and they'll try to roll us again and again.

OTOH, because benefits are three times what we pay in, the Medicare payroll tax is gonna have to go up by a lot. Perhaps we could acquiesce to that with some serious effort to rein in Medicare's escalating costs.

 All the above "hang in there" advice is OK - up to a point. But, if I were your father, my advice would be "You're young and smart. Retool now. Because in ten more years the world may not be any better - and you won't be young."

 Some months/years from now, it would be interesting for you to write "Letter to a Young Claire Berlinski." Reality for those the Economist calls brain-workers is evolving before our eyes.

And BTW, I've got my kids' backs. It's the least I can do since they'll be paying for my Medicare.  :-)

 Thank you for saying "--- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are part of the social fabric and will not be easily abandoned even with the most eloquent and logical of arguments." Only the bond vigilantes will cause us to significantly change those programs, and conservatives need to get over their notion that significant change can otherwise occur.

There is no simple solution for Medicare. Somehow we have to find the means to bend the cost curve; regrettably, many possibilities are not acceptable to the populace. Death panels anyone?

WRT Medicare, remember that we receive three dollars of benefit for every one we pay in. Today the taxes being paid into Medicare plus what's in the trust fund(?) is enough to cover all the medical expenses of retired fogies like me. In other words, no monies are needed from the general fund to pay for my medical expenses. That ends in 2017 (or earlier given the recession). I imagine the Demos are expecting/hoping  that the general fund will pay the shortfall beginning in 2017.

 As a grad of Jesuit hi school and college 5 decades ago, and with two children grads of Jesuit colleges, I'm interested in comments and discussion about such schools.

I said after your first post that I looked forward to the rest; they have been enjoyable and informative. But, I have been intending all week to get you to the exact point in a talk that Alterman gave touting his own new book : Kabuki something-or-other. But alas I've run out of time. It was a remarkable and disgusting hour. The quote I wanted you to hear was something along the line of "in the old days (before the MSM became so enfeebled), we used to be able to take their reporting and re-purpose it for use in support of progressive causes." I thought when I heard it that it was a remarkable admission of the leftist slant of the MSM. At this instant, I don't have time to find the quote in the talk. Sorry for that, but it is contained in http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Kabuk.

A truly regrettable outcome. I read this thread last night and thought how wonderful that it wasn't the usual hallelujah chorus. And this morning I decided that I would follow Giberson to see what he was riling up. And Eagar and Think So. Oh well.

 Way cool. I read the excerpts at PLine and was fascinated that a scientific study had been done on the topic. As a statisticker, I was interested in your methodology, and am glad that you've provided insight here. Thanks also for all the links. I look forward to your discussion about Alterman; he's a vile person. Anything else you have to say about the left's response will be of interest.

I'll have to take the test. A quick skim foretells a right-of-Genghis score!

Conservatives have been a bit lax of late about the wars that people have talked us into, hence your comments about neo-conservatism I guess. But OTOH, the world wars and the Cold War were about many things including these universal human rights.

One great speech! Can he be drafted at the convention?!?