I responded, "Darn right, Henry! (Or at least more than whatever social science is in second place.)"
By a former NSA counterintelligence officer.
For readers who've mostly ignored emailgate — assuming it would disappear — and now feel the need to catch up, here's a primer on why it matters.
And this doesn't sound good at all for Mrs. Clinton: " Hillary Intentionally Originated And Distributed Highly Classified Information".
Related to Mrs. Clinton's email and yet one more reason why I wouldn't vote for her: "Hillary Clinton’s Sycophantic Inner Circle".
Related to related: read about, and be absolutely amazed at, Hillary Clinton's "distinguished record of accomplishment".
XKCD, doing his thing.
He notes that the Infiniti Toothy69 and the Nissan Doody are "names to avoid" while the Porsche Zizek9000 and the Acura Pizzajazz are "potential winners".
Somewhere Big Al is shuddering.
It’s a bad day both for Albert Einstein and for hackers. The most rigorous test of quantum theory ever carried out has confirmed that the ‘spooky action at a distance’ that the German physicist famously hated — in which manipulating one object instantaneously seems to affect another, far away one — is an inherent part of the quantum world.
John Kay makes an argument that I've seen elsewhere, but he does it exceptionally well:
But the technological advances of the past decade seem to have increased the efficiency of households, rather than the efficiency of businesses, to an unusual extent. An ereader in the pocket replaces a roomful of books, and all the world’s music is streamed to my computer. We look at aggregate statistics and worry about the slowdown in growth and productivity. But the evidence of our eyes seems to tell a different story.
Very encouraging. (Unless you belong to OPEC.)
Since oil prices began falling, most shale producers have responded by embracing hard times, working to make their operations more efficient, renegotiating contracts with service companies (such as Halliburton) and, most significant, cutting production costs and spending on new wells.
Instead of slowing in the face of low oil prices, the rate of innovation seems to be accelerating.
I think S. E. Cupp is on to something here.
I'd add that other elements in Trump's appeal are he seems to be spontaneous and he seems to be having fun. We have so many politicians who talk in poll-tested, focus-grouped, overly-rehearsed phrases that Trump, by sounding approximately human, seems refreshing. (To be clear: I don't want him to come within 1000 miles of being president. But it is worth trying to understand his appeal.)
Watch him mug and yell his way through an attack on "low energy" folks and one particular "sleaze-bag" and "perv" to the crowd's audible delight and see if you agree.
UPDATE: Victor Davis Hanson also has a fine analysis today.
Matches my observation: rarely is anything ever good enough for Liberals. As an old joke goes, "Give them an inch and they want a foot. Give them a foot and they want a yard. Give them a yard and they want a swimming pool built in it."
Guess. Go ahead, guess.
Could it be that progressive policies intended to reduce income inequality actually cause it to increase? Quite likely, yes. The reason has to do with the effect of these policies on the low end of the income distribution. The government doesn’t count the distribution of in-kind benefits as income—and means-tested handouts create incentives for recipients to keep their measured incomes low. Further, where higher minimum wages—another progressive agenda item—cause higher unemployment, we see even more zero-income earners. Having lots of low-earners or zero-earners doesn’t help reduce inequality. Meanwhile, at the high end of the income distribution, taking money from high earners through higher marginal tax rates is not counted in official statistics as a cut in income—which means that income inequality again doesn’t shrink.
(To be clear, progressive policies are far from the only cause. But that they contribute, even a little, seemingly would shock most Liberals.)
Milo Yiannopoulos, doing his thing:
So perhaps there is, in this case, some justification for a bit of middle-class discomfort, particularly when you consider how bizarre and inconsistent and dysfunctional the city of San Francisco is: it’s a place that turns a blind eye to illegal immigrants, proudly admitting its “sanctuary city” status, while effectively evicting poor hard-working families and allowing large sections of its own downtown to become lawless, homeless hellholes.
Via Ed Driscoll, blogging at Instapundit, who notes, "Troll level: Grandmaster"
Kyle Smith, reviewing Ronald Bailey's new book, The End of Doom: Environmental Renewal in the Twenty-first Century:
Environmentalist groups are, of course, in the same business as the folks who brought you the “Saw” movies. Their fundraising depends on it, and the media rarely go back to fact-check past predictions, instead blustering ahead with the next dire warning.
Bailey doesn’t claim that global challenges simply resolve themselves — although, as we have seen, some scares were fictitious, based on junk science to begin with.
The doomsayers simply never account for the role of human cooperation and ingenuity in confronting challenges. . . .
So will global warming, a much more complicated issue than CFCs, be resolved by cooperation or ingenuity? Ask yourself which science has seen more breakthroughs in the last few decades — political science or technology.
Related: Matt Ridley, "The Green Scare Problem".
Also related: Jonathan V. Last, "Remember Ebola?"
"What recent research says about fraud, errors, and other dismaying academic problems."
Related: "Science Isn’t Broken: It’s just a hell of a lot harder than we give it credit for". Includes a very clever simulation exercise, "Hack Your Way to Scientific Glory".
Also related: "Many Psychology Findings Not as Strong as Claimed, Study Says" and "A Deep Dive Into the Blockbuster Study That Called Into Doubt a Lot of Psych Research". (I'll bet you the best drink in the house that these problems currently affect psychology and sociology more than economics.)
And still more, on a related but separate problem: "64 more papers retracted for fake reviews, this time from Springer journals".
Arnold Kling, with yet another terrific post. This one is on "the analytical gap between the theory of market failure and actual policy". His example is housing policy:
From the standpoint of the theory of market failure, the subsidize-demand, restrict-supply pattern almost never makes sense. If there is a market failure that results in under-production of a good, then it makes sense to subsidize both demand and supply. If the market failure results in over-production, then it makes sense to restrain both demand and supply. Subsidies for demand and restrictions on supply inherently work at cross purposes.
But, hey, who minds cross purposes when there is graft to get and there are interest groups to pay off?
Words to remember:
As the Nation‘s article notes, “Most ordinary people behave remarkably well when their city is ripped apart by disaster. They did in San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake; in New Orleans during Hurricane Betsy in 1965; in Mexico City after the 1985 earthquake; in New York City in the aftermath of 9/11; and in most disasters in most times and places.
“Those in power, on the other hand, often run amok.”
Link via Instapundit.
Glenn Reynolds offers a compact and very discouraging review.
As late as 2010, things were going so well in Iraq that Obama and Biden were bragging. Now, after Obama’s politically-motivated pullout and disengagement, the whole thing’s fallen apart. This is near-criminal neglect and incompetence, and an awful lot of people will pay a steep price for the Obama Administration’s fecklessness.
It sure looks that way. Advice on salt, dietary cholesterol, and, now, saturated fat appear to have been seriously wrong.
I can't vouch for all of it, but taken at face value, there's a bunch of stuff here I certainly didn't know.
"How migrant climbed four fences, dodged 400 security cameras - then RAN 31 miles through Channel Tunnel from Calais to Kent . . ."
I kinda think that unless he's a criminal, if he wants to get in that badly, let him in.
Short version: that's what you have a liver and kidneys for.
Made me laugh. (Not for easily offended non-Americans.)
Especially useful if you feel that some of the music of decades ago is better than the great majority of today's music.
Crosby, Stills, & Nash, "Change Partners," Winterland, 10-7-73.
Van Morrison and The Band, "Caravan," Winterland, 11-25-76.
Aretha, "Bridge Over Troubled Water," Fillmore West, 3-6-71.
And Randy Newman performing his savagely satirical "Sail Away," Passaic, NJ, 2-11-78.
Rock on, 96th Street Elementary.
Nobody takes offense, everybody pitches in. It's a radical concept in a school district where the teachers union, United Teachers Los Angeles, has fought the district for years over teacher evaluations, and where ineffective teachers are allowed to continue using the same techniques — in some cases for decades.
More good news: "After Katrina, Fundamental School Reform in New Orleans".
Not to worry, though, because the Democrats are “accepting suggestions for a new name” for their fund-raising dinners.
By these standards, one wonders who else among the party’s historical luminaries could possibly make the cut. Let’s consider the options.
Similar, and also funny: "A modest proposal for Democrats purging their problematic history".
Being a Democrat is hard. You know deep down in your bones that you’re a “forward-looking” and “inclusive” person, but then you look at the current field of candidates seeking your party’s presidential nomination in 2016 and see five boring white people with an average age of 65.
"Here are some of the hardest questions 3rd-graders had to answer on New York's statewide math test"
I'll give them this: these questions are a lot harder than I remember my third grade math being.
"The new era of the $400 college textbook, which is part of the unsustainable higher education bubble"
The third most expensive textbook on this list is Landsburg's Price Theory and Applications for $348.65.
But I'll happily testify that it's worth every penny.
Great story. Moral: don't even think about messing with Mom.