For example, we've already seen rising oil prices contribute to a global recession, which, in large parts of the world, has led to drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The economic impact of peak oil, in that sense, may actually postpone, or delay global warming.

Yes, and in fact, I doubt there's any "may" to it. When we reach "peak oil", we will necessarily be generating less CO2. If you believe that climate change is a result of human generated CO2 (as most climate scientists do), then it's hard to see how you DON'T get at least a postponement in warming.

"A bunch of people that watched 'Schoolhouse Rock' growing up think that they understand how the Senate works, and they don’t."

I'll tell you what I understand. I understand that's the Senate's fucking job to pass legislation, and it's not doing it's job. If the rules are so screwed up that you can't get anything through, then change the goddamned rules.

This is ridiculous. I am tired of the Senate leadership (and anonymous Senate aides) throwing up their hands and claiming that nothing can be done because of the rules. The problem is that when it comes right down to it, the Senate cares more about its precious traditions and the prerogatives of Senators than it does about the actual welfare of the United States. As an institution, they'd rather just fail to accomplish their mission than change their rules.

I was really feeling the outrage here until this point:

It's true that an occasional mom without a daughter experienced an obvious moment of longing. Dads who already had girls were congratulatory enough. But dads who only had girls seemed, at times, to be overcompensating, trying too hard to prove just how cool they were with it.

Ok, so what REALLY happened was that you got some reactions that favored having a boy, and some that favored having a girl, but you decided to discount the "favoring a girl" faction, on the grounds that their reactions were somehow insufficiently authentic.

Yawn. Broadsheet, there are plenty of stories of ACTUAL sexism in the world - couldn't you have told one of those instead?

Hot new thing? What? Weight loss for the mother was being touted as a benefit of breast feeding when my daughter was born... like 7 years ago. This is not exactly what I would call "news". Also: yes, some people use the breastfeeding issue as one of the many tools in their bag to help them feel superior to other parents. It doesn't follow, though, that EVERY mention of breastfeeding is an attempt to keep bottle-feeding mom's down. This seems like a pretty straightforward (if dated) discussion of one of the supposed benefits of breastfeeding.

@lolcait:

Another dumb and pointless Salon article. You wouldn't have been concerned with the hero's experience level if the hero wasn't female. Ironic huh.

Holy crap, lolcait. Did you miss the description of this section of the web site? Here's a hint: it's about women's issues. So perhaps you should be a little less upset when they talk about, you know, women stuff.

Not TCF's blog post, which seemed to be a fairly good analysis of the Vanity Fair article. I'm talking about the Vanity Fair article itself. When you get to the point where your conclusion is "making a baby laugh" == "torturing the baby"... well, let's just say that you may be overthinking it a little.

... I still think Johnston needs to crawl back under the rock he slithered out from. Trig Palin is a disabled baby, for God's sake. Stop dragging him into your feud with his mother.

Of course, the elder Palin isn't helping herself any by engaging with this. The proper answer to Johnston's statements would be "I'm not going to dignify that with a response"... and that only if asked. Continuing to fire back at him via press release only encourages him.

And are men really so dense that they need a PhD to remind them to bring their umbrella when it's raining?

Holy crap, no kidding. If I were so stupid as to go out in the winter with wet hair and no coat, then I probably ought to be removed from the gene pool.

This Times article is a perfect example of how feminism is good for men too - in a more equal world, it wouldn't be presumed that men are so stupid they need their wives to remind them to keep breathing. Thanks for pointing this out.

[regarding increase in hours worked by existing employees] ...but not much help on the employment front.

How is this not helping "on the employment front"? Surely some people will move from the category of "working, but not getting enough hours" to "working and getting all the hours I want"... which in turn helps the U6 number. I don't understand this comment.

I'm a veteran myself, and normally I recommend the service to those interested in it, as I think it's a great way to explore a career option that most people never experience. But I'm not sure it's right for you. There's nothing wrong with joining the service to find yourself - but I don't think it should be the only reason. I think you'd be better served to work more directly on the problems you're experiencing, and then, when your head is clear, joining up still sounds like a good idea... do it then. Otherwise, you could be setting yourself up for a pretty miserable four years. Remember that you can't just quit.