New-born French and German babies cry differently. To scientists this suggests some component of language acquisition occurs in utero. To me it suggests a joke, but I haven’t been able to think of a punch line.

There’s a raging storm of politically-correct denialism about Hasan’s motivation – Who ever heard of such a thing? What could have caused it? Incomprehensible! Inexplicable! Inconceivable! Things will have to get worse before they get better. Others have written about this and will continue to, but let me consider a few things.

Hasan was upset because people talked mean to him; called him names. I’m sorry, but wtf? A major in the US Army? It’s not like he was a junior nco and the sergeant major called him a dumb ass. Did an enlisted man or junior officer call him a rag-head? Rip the offender a new one. Did a colonel call him a sand-jockey? Have it out with him on the spot, or file a complaint if you’re that kind of guy.

And again, a major, and a medical officer; so he shoots civilians, unarmed junior enlisted men, and a physician’s assistant; while shouting “Allah Akbar.” Yes, God is great. Hasan is a contemptible coward.

His relatives say Hasan’s worst nightmare was being deployed to Afghanistan. Even if he was thinking of his personal safety or comfort, it’s not like he would have been going out on patrols. He’s a Major, and a psychiatrist. He’d have been sitting in an office in a rear area, talking to people and writing reports, eating in the officer’s mess, sleeping in officers’ quarters – field-grade officers’ quarters, if they still divide it up like that.

Okay, that’s not seventy-two virgins in a garden watered by rivers of honey and wine. But he didn’t die in his attack. He was shot (by a woman) and taken into custody. When he regains consciousness and sees his circumstances, he’s going to have a different worst nightmare. Hopefully one productive of repentance, about life in federal prison and the fate of sinners in the hands of an angry God. A year at Bagram airbase may not look so bad then.

Can a wind-driven vehicle travel down-wind faster than the wind? Doc says yes.

Hey, Republicans!

Got the conservatives locked up? Thinking your votes will ingratiate you with the left while your speeches energize the base? Think again, and read the post-script. Having an R after your name won’t magically make conservatives vote for you.

Normally it’s pointless to link to the Insatpundit, but it’s necessary for this quote: “They’d never dare to do this sort of thing to subcultures they’re afraid of.” That explains a lot about the regrettable rise of the British National Party.

The underlying story involves yet more heavy-handed government intrusion: Parents banned from watching their children in playgrounds… in case they are paedophiles. England is a few years ahead of America on this one, but we’re headed in the same wrong direction.

Last night I watched It’s the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, while reading Paul Cobley’s Introducing Semiotics during the (muted) commercials.

That’s got to mean something really profound.

At least that’s what I think today. “The Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab creates insight into how computing products — from websites to mobile phone software — can be designed to change what people believe and what they do.” Right. What could possibly go wrong?

Social conservatives should address “…not just one or two political questions, but a whole range of social problems, with an overriding concern for the importance of the family and the lives of the most vulnerable human beings. Even if today’s hot-button issues fade, this kind of social conservatism will still remain.” — Social Conservatism Is Here to Stay

“The majority of revolutionists are the enemies of discipline and fatigue mostly. There are natures, too, to whose sense of justice the price exacted looms up monstrously enormous, odious, oppressive, worrying, humiliating, extortionate, intolerable. Those are the fanatics. The remaining portion of social rebels is accounted for by vanity, the mother of all noble and vile illusions, the companion of poets, reformers, charlatans, prophets, and incendiaries.” — from The Secret Agent, by Joseph Conrad

“The State of Michigan created a shell corporation for the sole purpose of unionizing self-employed daycare owners throughout the state. Some state bureaucracy partnered with the apparently randomly chosen Mott Community College and declared this new entity to be the ‘employer’ of all of the state’s licensed daycare owners, including all the ladies who run daycare centers out of their own homes. By doing so, the State of Michigan created the possibility of having all these ‘employees’ unionize against the employer. Since evidently there is no quorum requirement for union votes, a vote of only a minority of the newly minted ‘employees’ was sufficient to create a new union, and now the women running daycare out of their homes are being charged union dues, much to their own surprise.” — The state can make almost anybody its employee?