Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Ollie on John Kerry's plan for IraqThis is the must read article of the week. Just go read it.
You should be a DemocratSondra K. gives us a juxtaposition of Jimmy Carter's reasoning why you should be a democrat with Neal Boortz's repose. Very funny.
My wife once asked a friend why she was a Democrat and her response was "because I believe in Democracy". I wanted to tell her to move to France, but I couldn't stop laughing long enough.
Is the military too big?Go read this article at the National Summary if you think it is. I hate it when facts get in the way of the radical lefty agenda!
When you look at the list of nations please notice how all the EU nations are absent from the top of it. This is why we had to go jump into the Yugoslav conflict. They couldn't cope with even poor little Yugoslavia, right in their own back yard, without help from the "oppressive, hate mongering yanks". Military allies without a military are not a great deal of help.
Professor Bainbridge snubs Harvard facultyIn this TCS Daily article he offers a possible explanation for why women make up such a small percentage of large law firm partners.
This research suggests that self-sorting on the basis of risk preferences may explain at least part of the lingering gender disparities among large law firm partners. This inference finds some support in a recent study by Muriel Niederle and Lise Vesterlund, which found that women seek to avoid competition, which may help explain why they are less likely to obtain promotions and more lucrative jobs.I can't wait to see the backlash. Women are risk averse? How dare he.
I once opined in mixed company that I thought there were very few women in CompSci because most women probably weren't interested in it. I got more than one ear full. How is that degrading?
Oh well, it is a very informative article, go read it.
The missing link?You have got to go read this commentary on the 375 million year old fish recently found. (HT: Hugh) I haven't laughed this hard about a topic this serious in a very long time. When I first read the story I thought "much ado about nothing, we have current examples alive today that sound closer to a supposed link". But Doug rips the entire article apart in a very funny, and intellectually honest, way.
2 way rape shield laws?Great commentary on the Duke rape allegation case at DukeNewSense. (HT: Powerline) It really just isn't at all clear what happened here. What is clear is that the reputations of a bunch of college kids is severely damaged even if it is eventually "proven" that no crime was committed.
I was all in favor of rape shield laws to prevent the press from trying the victims of rape on the evening news. I am becoming more and more convinced that, due to the nature of the crime, those laws should go both ways.
If they did it, publish the names after they are proven guilty, then toss them in jail. If they didn't do it their ID should also be shielded. Even the allegation of rape is a stigma no innocent person should have to carry around.