HR 2122, passed in 2205, makes it clear that breastfeeding on federal property is protected. The airports are covered by both federal and state law.

http://www.house.gov/maloney/breast.htm) about breastfeeding on federal property

Since the airplane was on the tarmac it was under federal as well as state guidelines.

Thirty seven state protect public breastfeeding by law

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/breast50.htm

The 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits gender discrimination, and anti-breastfeeding antics fall under the rubric of gender discrimination for lawsuits. Depending on which venue it is, the parents can choose either federal law. Evidently, there have been a number of successful lawsuits. http://baby.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Breastfeeding_in_Public#The_Right_to_Breastfeed_in_Public

The average age of weaning in the world appears to be 4 at this point.

I have breastfed on Delta flights in the past (about 7 years ago) without incident. Anyone staring would have had my husband's fist in his face. Most were just happy the baby was not screaming.

Delta is at risk of a pretty big lawsuit, but since it is in bankrupcy, any settlement would be thrown to the court.

As for the people objecting to children, it was a single adult pushing the chair into my knees, and another single adult inflicting his music on the plane, who made the flight hell. I'll take children on a flight any day of the week over some clueless adults out there. There is no guarantee of peace on a flight. If there are no children, you will be seated next to a talker.

It amended the Pregnancy Discrimination act and the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

When my husband was laid off, we gave it 6 months of job hunting. The problem is that experience becomes stale to employers in 6 months, and the H1B issue for technical fields is still a problem.

He retrained (I co-signed the loans). He had a good temp job immediately out of the three month course from U of Minnesota, which led to two good job offers for more money than before within 2 months.

The combination of retraining and job fairs (plus the help the career services office at a university can give) bypasses the people in HR who tend to be age averse and hidebound.

LW needs to be supportive. I just can't have sympathy. Anyone can be laid off, and can get depressed with it. Women have always had to step up to help family economically. Maybe because I am a middle class black woman, I can't wrap my mind around her "manhood" argument. Is she with him because he pays bills, or because she wants to be? This is not a good climate for the unemployed, depite the idiot propaganda and gas being claimed by economists (the good jobs are increasingly scarce). Once you have kids you can't be so selfish.

I don't think marriage would help her see the incomes as "ours". As one poster suggested, they got together in 1990, an age of layoffs. What else are they naive about, do they lack backup plans about? This "it'll never happen to me" grasshopper mentality is not bright.

I gave the general cite Dr. Sears gave at his website, but there's plenty of other places. Our HR confirmed it to me, as well as our legal person here. If I want to breastfeed in an airport, federal building, whatever, I can. From Breastfeeding.com

The good news about breastfeeding in public is that in the United States, women are gaining more breastfeeding rights. In 1998, U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (a Democrat from New York) introduced legislation (The Right to Breastfeed Act, H.R. 1848) to protect a woman's right to breastfeed on federal property where she and her child have a right to be. The bill was signed into law on Sept. 28, 1999 when President Clinton signed the Treasury Postal Appropriations bill, which included Rep. Maloney's Right to Breastfeed Act. http://www.breastfeeding.com/advocacy/advocacy_bfinpublic.html

HR 2122 was an amednment expanding the rights to breastfeed at the federal level, and built on the 1999 law. HR2122 was passed in 2005. So yes, you have the right to breastfeed on federal land, in buildings, etc. The 1999 HR 1848 established the right and 2005 HR2122 expanded it. Both are passed and in operation

Some people may not like it, but that really doesn't matter. Delta was probably legally in the wrong here. As another poster said, Delta doesn't care about jammed up knees, really loud walkmans, drunken seatmates, underdressed flyers,etc. When they start enforcing comfort, start with the seat backs and space!

His teams don't win the clutches.

I believe this emerging pattern was a direct result of the madness. The best teams come out of their regular seasons and conference championships peaked for playing in the NCAA tournament. The Hoosiers began emerging from their season looking like prisoners of war on their way to the box.

A close look at those Hoosier teams of the late '80's and '90's would reveal players that had been completely depleted, dis-spirited and bled dry by a full season of the madness. A lot of ball players were paying the price for Indiana's success.

I started turning against Knight during these years.

I would no longer justify how he was treating the players. The madness had long past anything resembling common sense.

It was quite simple to turn on the tv and watch Dean Smith and Mike Krzyzewski get better results while treating their kids with a decency that rivaled what they got at home.

This stuff just doesn't work. He has no Plan B, and no way to adjust.

Retire him. It's time. He doesn't deserve these apologies.