Sulfuric acid and male chauvinism as a function of Otherness.  Granted, chemical burns aren’t, under the twisted rationale of an establishment feminism that oftentimes finds itself caught in the logical snare of its own fidelity to identity politics, as potentially empowering as covering up in a burlap sack.  But it’s hard to deny that melted skin and a useless eye don’t practically force a gal to assert her individuality… (h/t

Thomas Sowell, on the way the MSM chooses and frames its “scandals” (which, in case you needed it, provides additional anecdotal evidence for a media that not only skews left, but—when at all plausible—protects its ideological fellow travelers from potentially negative scrutiny): Before the Washington Madam surfaced, the big scandal in town was the Bush administration’s firing of eight U.S. Attorneys. But it was not a scandal, as far as

From the Guardian of all places, an interesting analysis of “anti-faith” proselytizing as a growth industry.  Madeleine Bunting, “The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it”: What [the New Atheists] all have in common is a loathing of an increasing religiosity in US politics, which has contributed to a disastrous presidency and undermined scientific understanding. [Daniel] Dennett excoriates the madness of a faith that looks forward

From Ace, citing the media embargo of a Rasmussen poll “finding that 61% of self-identifying Democrats either believe George Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks in advance or are not sure if he did or not”: […] when 61% of Democrats state they believe that George Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance, or may have known of them—thus making George Bush a co-conspirator in the attacks—the media not

Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat : “Listen, pal.  Without me, you’d still be busing tables and playing a foppish cat at some godawful dinner theater.  So thank your lucky stars we met, and when I tell you to go buy me a hoagie and a forty of MGD, go buy me a hoagie and a forty of MGD—or else I’ll be forced to find one of the gazillion other desperate Josephs who’ll

From Expatica, “Police battle anti-Sarkozy protestors”: Riot squads fired tear gas Sunday at protestors throwing stones, bottles and, in one instance, acid at police in cities across France after right-winger Nicolas Sarkozy’s presidential victory. Clashes took place at Paris’ Place de la Bastille, where about 5,000 supporters of the defeated Socialist candidate Segolene Royal had gone to await the election results and had stayed on after Sarkozy’s triumph. Up to

—at least, so argues “conservationist” Paul Watson of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, who, let me add, might better have illustrated his point had he leapt from a rooftop rather than expending the hot air necessary to cast himself in the role of public neo-Malthusian. But then, isn’t that always the way with these reformers? And Watson is not alone:  as with any religion—and make no mistake, the Green movement

Charles Krauthammer, “Rewriting History”: One of the major myths (or, more accurately, conspiracy theories) about the Iraq war—that it was foisted upon an unsuspecting country by a small band of neo-conservatives—[…] lives blissfully detached from history. The decision to go to war was made by a war Cabinet consisting of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld.  No one in that room could even remotely be

I wonder how Jeff’s barbeque went.

Some commenters here have questioned the degree to which folks at PW engage in historical analysis of current events.  And to be fair, history is not a perfect guide, as events rarely repeat themselves exactly. However, for a cautionary tale about how an ignorance of history can combine with prejudice to hysterical results, one need look no further than Garrison Keillor: It’s good for an old liberal like me to