Image above: Matisse's 1906 Le Bonheur de Vivre. It's in the new Barnes Museum in Philly.
Is food medicine? Immortality is but a diet away.
Planned Parenthood’s Self-Destructive Behavior
How we die
Political Scientists Are Lousy Forecasters
Putting Failed States on the Map
EU should 'undermine national homogeneity' says UN migration chief
Morsi Says “Our Capital Shall Be Jerusalem!”
Bawer: Fear and Loathing of Reality at ‘The Nation’
Romney Is Mr. Normal:
No president in memory has done more to divide America than Barack Obama. Exploiting every division for political gain, he has pitted poor against rich, blacks and Hispanics against whites, gays against straights, women against men, young against old, and union members against business and government leaders. Mainstream Americans are tired of these divisions, and they want a president who speaks of "believing in America," not believing in black America, Hispanic America, young America, female America, gay America, or unionized America.
The American people are tired of change. What they want is jobs, better wages, stability, and security.
Rex Murphy on Obama: America’s celebrity president
The Obama campaign never sold Obama; it sold the idea of Obama.
Obama/Biden campaign hit bottom with wedding gift appeal
MSNBC Yapper: Top Dem Senators Fed Up With Obama’s Incompetence
NYT: Democrats shocked to discover that 2,700-page Obamacare bill that no one read or understood could be ruled unconstitutional
How ObamaCare Increases Income Inequality
Obama: We need more taxes and regulations, so we can have more bottom-up economics
Hmong pilots saluted in Maplewood
A response to Dr. Paul Bain’s use of ‘denier’ in the scientific literature
...you directly imply that I am a “denier”, as I am highly skeptical of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (not just “anthropogenic global warming”, which is plausible if not measurable, although there are honest grounds to doubt even this associated with the details of the Carbon Cycle that remain unresolved by model or experiment). Since I am a theoretical physicist, I find this enormously offensive. I might as well label you an idiot for using it, when you’ve never met me, have no idea of my competence or the strength of my arguments for or against any aspect of climate dynamics (because on this list I argue both points of view as the science demands and am just as vigorous in smacking down bullshit physics used to challenge some aspect of CAGW as I am to question the physics or statistical analysis or modelling used to “prove” it). But honestly, you probably aren’t an idiot (are you?) and no useful purpose is served by ad hominem or emotionally loaded human descriptors
