Sorry, nothing much tonight either. I gotta run around and do stuff, and give somebody a ride too. But here’s a link from Redstate, which amuses me. (Warning: it’s political.)

I promise I’ll try to post something tomorrow.

I have another column up at The American Spectator Online today. It’s about mainline Lutherans and diversity.

But that’s the New York Times for you. Opinion Journal points out an article on the NYT website by Freakonomics author Steven D. Levitt, who asks, “If you were a terrorist, how would you attack?”

Now, that question alone is a little shocking, but more importantly, it’s the same type of question the Pentagon asked in 2003 to the Times’ harsh criticism. “The insensitivity of the idea boggles the mind. . . . The project’s theoretical underpinnings are equally absurd,” they said back then. Now they must think it’s an acceptable query.

James Taranto concludes, “Has the Times become more sensible since 2003? The question answers itself. Thus it must be that the Times has become more absurd, ridiculous and mind-bogglingly insensitive.”

The New Republic’s “Baghdad Diarist” wrote remarkable stories citing anonymous sources. Apparently, those stories were fantasy, not journalism. The “diarist” has even recanted under oath.

World Magazine founder Joel Belz writes on former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s statements to the press, that they report like pack animals, if you can call it reporting. The modern press, Blair says, are scandal-mongers.

The BBC has canceled phone-in contests after confessing some of their previous contests had phony winners. During the contests, apparently technical problems arose which prevented callers from getting through. Instead of postponing the contest, employees of the BBC faked a winner. The Telegraph lists some specific shows.

Updating a earlier story on the BBC, the production company responsible for depicting the Queen as storming out of a photo shoot, when she did nothing of the kind, has apologized for embarrassing the BBC and essentially lying about the Queen.

It appears light is exposing lies and deception at the BBC.

Dr. Judith Hardanger-Hansen writes again, in another column by me over at the American Spectator Online today.

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski won’t lead the news with a story on Paris Hilton getting out of jail. This is remarkable. Her bosses had better treat her well.

In Reuters article on a possible cure for a common form of blindness, the reporter writes, “Embryonic stem cells are the ultimate master cells of the body, giving rise to all of the tissues and organs. Their use is controversial because many people oppose embryo destruction, although Britain has encouraged such research.”

I guess this is par of the course in our culture of death, but explanations like this still surprise me. Sure, some people oppose using unborn children as medicine, but more than that, as I understand it, embryonic stem cells have not accomplished anything in the lab. They are praised and hoped for, but the real results have come from adult stem cells about which there is no controversy.