« Myth Busters: IRC Edition | Main | Fiction, Fantasy and Fallacy: The Collected Works of EJ Montini »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What can anyone expect from an anti-establishment operation that bases virtually all their stories on poking people in the eye? The whole operation, from the top down, is based on shock value. It's the print version of shock jocks--the more rebellious, the more raunchy, the more vulgar, the more in your face, the better. It's like the whole staff is made up of a bunch of college sophomores on a drinking and whoring binge.

Since the NYT says it, I'd want to see actual proof before passing judgement.

Matt makes a valid point and, by implication, raises the question of whether RonJ was referring to New Times or the NYT. Oh how the mighty have fallen!

Excellent points. LOL

no man should be judge in his own case – is widely thought to capture a bedrock principle of natural justice and constitutionalism. The U.S. Supreme Court calls it “a mainstay of our system of government” and regularly invokes it in diverse contexts, and the principle has venerable roots in the common law. I will argue that the nemo iudex principle is worse than an outright falsehood; it is a misleading half-truth. Sometimes rulemakers in public law do and should design institutions to respect the value of impartiality that underlies nemo iudex principle.

Let's take a look at the pie chart to make better sense of ovulation and when you are at your most fertile.

The comments to this entry are closed.