Reidy

Sciabarra tracked down her academic transcripts several years ago.

Vocabulary question: I thought a visa was an authorization to enter a country. If you're trying to leave your home country, don't you want a passport?

I second your analysis. If the Republicans get control of the House we'll be in for two years of rancorous, bad-willed divided government that won't be able to move any big legislation, and that's the best we could have hoped for. Another piece of good news is that the state-level abortion initiatives went the way I hoped. At National Review they're already trying to rationalize it away.

Friedman was making the point even longer ago than that.

The AtlasSphere was in that business several years ago, welcoming both straight and gay. I don't know if it's still active.

Remember Ma Chalmers and her soybeans?

Squadster Cori Bush wants to be rid of police forces, and she's a client of a private defense agency. Murray Rothbard must be smiling from wherever he is.

Say what you will about Dobbs, the recent EPA decision is shaping up as very good news. Here's an example of just how happy we should be.

PS: Don't forget chronic fatigue syndrome.

Part of the reason for increases in autism diagnoses, I suspect, is simply that it's become a fashionable diagnosis, like gender dysphoria and ADD. Fifty years ago it was hypoglycemia. It will always be something.

Apparently it's not available online. The cheapest edition is a $5.95 booklet.

Maybe times are changing at the Post. A year and a half after the New York Post and a week after the New York Times, they got around to admitting the truth about the Biden laptop. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-washington-post-finally-gets-around-to-confirming-the-hunter-biden-laptop-story/

This brings up a related question: how does the novel's historical setting affect first-time readers today? It was a bit of a period piece in 1957 (execs no longer took cross-country business trips by train; network radio was no longer the primary news and entertainment medium) and a bit more when I first read it. For most newcomers today it's a book of their great-grandparents' era. Does this make it harder or easier (or neither) to get into?

Historical question: What did Peikoff and his circle find wrong with Kelley in the first place? What touched off the Schwartz piece that in turn elicited Kelley's reply?

Side point: Rand got one detail wrong about The Best Years of our Lives. On p. 367-368 of Journals she says that the movie shows a rich businessman bouncing a war hero from a flight, when in fact the opening scene establishes that the businessman has a reservation while the vet is on standby. Most Americans of the era would have recognized that this is what "space available" means. She asks "What is the point of this episode - if not the implication that the vicious, unpatriotic rich are grossly indifferent to war heroes?" The point might be that the military is ungrateful to its vets for not buying them reserved seats, but more likely it's simply a way of heightening the character's tension, and the audience's, about seeing him safely home.