I am going through an experience that I would find hilarious if it were happening to someone else. Maybe future me will laugh at it and write about it, after it’s stopped happening to current me.
OK, that’s not the exact quote, but I think I captured the idea:
Swain’s speech must be curtailed, Yamin said: “What I’m really trying to show her is that she can’t continue to say these kinds of things on a campus that’s so liberal and diverse and tolerant” or “say bigoted things about her own students.”
It reminds me of the line from Dr. Strangelove. “Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here, this is the War Room.”
The Left keeps using that word “liberal.” I don’t think it means what they think it means.
I’d come to watch the Adsheads poke at decaying stoats because they are nature lovers. So are most New Zealanders. Indeed, on a per-capita basis, New Zealand may be the most nature-loving nation on the planet. With a population of just four and a half million, the country has some four thousand conservation groups. But theirs is, to borrow E. O. Wilson’s term, a bloody, bloody biophilia. The sort of amateur naturalist who in Oregon or Oklahoma might track butterflies or band birds will, in Otorohanga, poison possums and crush the heads of hedgehogs. As the coördinator of one volunteer group put it to me, “We always say that, for us, conservation is all about killing things.”
It’s a bizarre story.
A number of commenters are wondering why I think this is bizarre. I guess it’s just because the notion of living in a place with no mammals whatsoever (other than humans) seems very weird to me. I understand that they’re not native, but I’ve lived with them all my life, and have trouble imagining their total absence. Would I even be allowed to keep a dog? Or a cat?
I think that today is the last one of the century that will have consecutive numbers.
Why do the Brits (and Aussies) do it wrong?
I’m hearing that they’re calling the tail number currently under construction “Hope.”
Not sure they thought that one through.
Let the snark commence in comments.
From an apparent idiot. Hard to tell if she’s serious, or if this is a parody.
That’s what this test says I am.
Collectivism score: -67%
Authoritarianism score: -33%
Internationalism score: 0%
Tribalism score: 17%
Liberalism score: 17%
[Update late evening]
You people are all fools. Either this test generates random results, or it’s a way for you all to claim that you’re not RINOs.
The big game, in the Big House.
The crowd always cheered in the stadium when the Slippery Rock score was announced. It’s a long-standing Michigan tradition.
OK, not really.
It be that day again, me hearties.
An email I just got from Amazon:
I hope this e-mail finds you well. Thank you very much for patiently waiting for my answer.
I’ve been checking regularly with our technical team on their progress with resolving the age range issue. It appears the issue is more complex than expected and we’re still working hard to get a solution for you.
I wanted to send you a quick e-mail to let you know the findings so far:
Since Amazon uses certain characters to classify books according to their content, it tends to be quite limited when it comes to character recognition. In the case of “Safe Is Not An Option,” although our platform gave you the chance to set the age ranges as 8 (min) and 18+ (max), the website is not displaying the (+) symbol because this character is generally used to determine when a book is of mature content or not. Since the book is targeted to people that are 8 and up, the system is finding a contradiction due the title being categorized as children’s, while being also set as an adult book because of the ’18+’.
We are aware indeed that what you wished to communicate is that the book was written for all people starting at age 8; even so, due to legal and international marketplace matters, the store has determined that the ‘+’ sign next to the ’18’ number makes reference exclusively to adult or erotica content, which results in a classification restriction. Due to this, the website removes the ‘+’ sign automatically and replaces it with the single ’18’ number to make your book fall within the appropriate ranges for children and adults.
We are still working to find a way to have the ‘8 – 18+’ displayed on your book’s page. Still, if by any chance the platform was unable to digest that entry, what I’d recommend to do is leave the age ranges as they are, and within the book’s description, you may clarify that the book is indeed intended for people aged 8 and up. I’ll let you know how everything goes!
I hope this information helps explain clearly the situation; I’m very sorry for how long this is taking, but I greatly appreciate your understanding!
I’ll be in touch again with an update as soon as possible.
Thanks again for your patience.
I’m kind of amazed that I’m the first person in Kindle history who wanted to show that a book could be enjoyed by children of all ages.
I’ve at least updated the book description to say that it’s suitable for all ages.
That’s what I had, until I found out this story wasn’t really true:
Pearson admitted during her arraignment that when she found the 88-year-old Venn trying to turn tricks she and her friends decided it would be funny to sleep ‘with an old guy.’ Word spread and lots of girls paid Venn for sex. Pearson said he only charged five dollars and gave them lollipops afterward.
Nice while it lasted, though.
Here’s the story on today’s announcement that ULA is teaming with Blue Origin to develop an RD-180 replacement. Thoughts anon.
[Update a while later, after the presser]
Clearly Jeff Bezos has declared war on Elon Musk. And ULA is showing how desperate it’s become. That’s what disruption looks like. More later, but I have to review our reply to Mann’s latest court filing. Speaking of which, I suspect that he regrets starting this hash tag.
[Update a while later]
Over on Twitter, Trampoline Rocket is speculating that this is vaporware, like Amazon’s drones. He makes a pretty good case.
[Update a while later]
Aaaaaand, Aaron Mehta’s take.
A woman in her twenties discovers that she was born without a cerebellum.
Speaking of modest proposals, check out this totalitarian feminist:
I believe we must remove men from the community and place them in their own specific sections of society, akin to subsidised or state-funded reservations, so they can be redefined. We can make not only men safer, but women as well. By subsidising said reservations through the state we can provide men with activities, healthcare, entertainment, shelter, protection, and everything that one could ever require in life. This will remove conventional inequality from society. By reducing the number of men to 10 percent of the total population, their socio-biovalue will be raised. They will live out their lives happily and safely, and male disposability will be a thing of the past.
I can’t wait.
Are you ashamed to do it?
It seems like a strange question to me. I don’t like eating out alone, but not because I think there’s any shame in it. I don’t like eating out, period. It’s expensive, it’s hard to eat healthy, and I don’t like people serving me. The only time I eat out alone is when I’m traveling alone. Eating out is something that I tolerate at best, not enjoy, unless I’m with good company, and then I’d still prefer to be eating a meal at home with them.
They can’t have it, because their brains are different.
…is that he lacks a sense of irony.
A dozen things you probably didn’t know about it. Note the comment about weightless gestation and birth.
Probably safe for work, but you might want to avoid if you’re pregnant.
The blackest material ever made.
He wrote himself a pretty awesome CV.
Of course, they don’t discuss how many cases involve BDSM.
A New Yorker reporter gives it a try.
I haven’t read the whole thing yet.
[A while later]
OK, I did read it. I was amused to learn that he was hawking it at my own local Whole Foods. One concern I have is his use of seed oils. Canola has too much omega 6 for my health. I’d use olive instead, though it costs more. If you don’t use virgin, though, it doesn’t have to cost that much.
From Beijing to CONUS? Under the Bering Strait?
I don’t think so.