"she, personally, is crazy"

"is the general understanding that Michelle Bachmann thinks God spoke to her with an actual voice?"

"is the general understanding that Michelle Bachmann thinks God spoke to her with an actual voice?"

"lines of questioning that would be seen as egregiously biased in real life…Maggie’s first question to Michele Bachmann (“What does God’s voice sound like?”)"

"lines of questioning that would be seen as egregiously biased in real life…Maggie’s first question to Michele Bachmann (“What does God’s voice sound like?”)"

I think the problem is it used to be funny, and now it seems to try not so much for being funny as being "heartwarming," "wry," or even "poignant," and instead of aiming for laughs, it aims for a "rueful chuckle."

I think the problem is it used to be funny, and now it seems to try not so much for being funny as being "heartwarming," "wry," or even "poignant," and instead of aiming for laughs, it aims for a "rueful chuckle."

I tend to dislike these stories where someone to whom the protag is not obligated, puts him through some "typical relationship shit."  I can never understand why he doesn't just walk away, or say something like, "You begged me to come here and now you're going to berate me for not being 'into it' enough?  Screw you."…

I tend to dislike these stories where someone to whom the protag is not obligated, puts him through some "typical relationship shit."  I can never understand why he doesn't just walk away, or say something like, "You begged me to come here and now you're going to berate me for not being 'into it' enough?  Screw you."…

So, in this analogy, the FW-supporters are in the same position as climate-change-deniers (that being the comparison you were making, I assume).  Yeah, that sounds about right.

So, in this analogy, the FW-supporters are in the same position as climate-change-deniers (that being the comparison you were making, I assume).  Yeah, that sounds about right.

The non-FW hypothesis is not that behavior is "inevitable" or that nothing will change.  It is that behavior is caused by factors that lie in the environment.  If the environment changes, the behavior of the organisms in it will also change.

The non-FW hypothesis is not that behavior is "inevitable" or that nothing will change.  It is that behavior is caused by factors that lie in the environment.  If the environment changes, the behavior of the organisms in it will also change.

The variables of which human behavior is a function lie in the environment.  That is useful information.

The variables of which human behavior is a function lie in the environment.  That is useful information.

"when Amy even brings up human free will not existing, they just quash [it]"

"when Amy even brings up human free will not existing, they just quash [it]"

"the whole free will debate  (which, when you come right down to it, is largely meaningless)"

"the whole free will debate  (which, when you come right down to it, is largely meaningless)"

Both tonight's episodes of BB and The Newsroom have essentially the same title: "5/1," "Fifty-One."  Just sayin'.