The mother, a pretty Asian woman in stylish clothes, filled up the bottle halfway, and then went up to buy a coffee. (Perhaps because the coffee, which is behind the counter, is much harder to steal.)

Sorry, Lady, but just because you buy a couch at the furniture store doesn't mean you get to steal a chair on your way out.

*I only don't have a picture of her and her baby in her $315 Maclaren Techno XT Stroller because I don't think it's right to take photos of people indoors. Believe me, I was way tempted to get a shot of the cute tot drinking her stolen milk.

Can't wait for Mommy to teach her kiddie ethics.

In a most impressive display of brain technology, scientists have used scanning technology to observe metabolic activity of the brain in action. In a typical demonstration, addicts are shown drug-related videos that depict people handling a crack pipe or needle. Brain scans capture the viewer's reaction to these provocative images and represent it as glowing technicolor splotches of color that represent activation in drug-sensitized brain regions. (Videos of neutral content, such as landscapes, induce no such response.) Even in users who quit several months ago, neuronal alterations may persist, leaving them vulnerable to sudden, strong urges to use. But addiction is not a brain state, it is a behavior. As philosopher Daniel Shapiro of West Virginia University puts it, "You can examine pictures of brains all day, but you'd never call anyone an addict unless he acted like one."

Furthermore, as Heyman says, much of the public, and a dismaying number of psychiatrists, psychologists, and neuroscientists, mistakenly believe that if a behavior is influenced by genes or mediated by the brain then the actor cannot choose his actions. While every behavior has a biological correlate (and a genetic contribution) and every experience that changes behavior does so by changing the brain, the critical question, Heyman wisely says, is not whether brain changes occur (they do) but whether these changes block the influence of the factors that support self-control.

In fairness, the scientists who forged the brain disease concept had good intentions. By placing addiction on equal footing with more conventional medical disorders, they sought to create an image of the addict as a hapless victim of his own wayward neurochemistry. They hoped this would inspire companies and politicians to allocate more funding for treatment. Also, by emphasizing dramatic scientific advances, such as brain imaging techniques, and applying them to addiction, they hoped researchers might reap more financial support for their work. Finally, promoting the idea of addiction as a brain disease would rehabilitate the addict's public image from that of a criminal who deserves punishment into a sympathetic figure who deserves treatment.

The WSJ, in "Civil Rights Overreach," speculates that there could very well be racial quotas to be met for college prep courses. Quoting Ed Secretary Arne Duncan:

In a speech last week, Mr. Duncan said that "in the last decade"--that's short for the Bush years--"the Office for Civil Rights has not been as vigilant as it should have been in combating racial and gender discrimination."

He cited statistics showing that white students are more likely than their black peers to take Advanced Placement classes and less likely to be expelled from school.

Is that because there are a lot of haters in teaching, or because white students are less likely to, say, come from homes with poor, unwed mothers? Children of non-intact families have the worst outcomes across the board, including in school.

Therefore, Mr. Duncan said, OCR "will collect and monitor data on equity." He added that the department will also conduct compliance reviews "to ensure that all students have equal access to educational opportunities" and to determine "whether districts and schools are disciplining students without regard to skin color."

Isn't that what most are doing now? And have done? We had a few black kids in my class when I was in school in suburban Detroit, and they were top students, taking AP classes. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that they, like me, had both a mommy and a daddy.

Commenter "Diogenes the Cynic" remarks on the WSJ site:

Perhaps an example closer to the subject - why do 1st and second generation children from Africa and the Caribbean ALSO do well? again because their parents make sure they do their homework and work hard. And those studies DID control for household income and not just broad statistical findings which this recent focus will now employ.

The WSJ piece continues:

The OCR under the Bush Administration rightly focused on reacting to actual complaints of discrimination and issued guidelines to help school districts comply with the law.

Can we stop foaming at the mouth about the Bush administration for a moment, and admit that their approach here was the right one? I was against the Iraq war, and, as a fiscal conservative, no fan of Big Spender Bush, but they were reacting to actual complaints -- as it should be. Not checking to see if they should give three white kids and three Asian kids detention because three black kids got it last week.

By contrast, Mr. Duncan plans investigations based on the disparate impact of a school policy, even if no one has alleged any discrimination. Schools and districts that don't have enough blacks taking college prep courses, or don't suspend enough whites for fighting, could face litigation or have federal funding withheld.

Inevitably, pressure will be put on districts to get their numbers right and avoid federal scrutiny. Safety is already a major problem in many larger urban schools, where it's not uncommon for students to pass through metal detectors each morning. If districts are afraid to suspend students for fear of an OCR probe, a bad situation is made worse. And if AP classes will now be monitored for racial balance, schools will resort to quotas, lower standards or no longer offer the courses.

Again, from my experience, as somebody who speaks pretty much monthly at an inner-city high school (recently, to a class of 11th graders reading at the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade level...which is not unusual at this school), what kids really need is not government policy that discriminates by skin color, but a home with a mommy and daddy in it.

Oh yeah, and let's add a school board prez who can write a sentence in comprehensible English. But, hey, the illiterate guy they have running the horrendous Detroit Public Schools is the right color. And that's what really counts, right?

Reynolds and Rasmussen analyze an emerging issue of singular importance that is highlighted by the insistence of President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress ramming Obamacare down the throats of the American people despite their clear and consistent opposition to the proposal.

But it's not simply one big bill or even a few big bills, it's a growing sense throughout Middle America - which is to say most citizens who are not part of the political class of elites in New York, Washington, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc. - that there are two sets of rules.

As Rasmussen describes it in the context of the TARP program and government using tax dollars for bailing out failing corporations:

"The American people have a clear understanding of this. Seventy percent believe that government and big business tend to work together against the rest of us and there is a sense that there are two sets of rules. There is one set of rules that most Americans play by, small businesses, churches, community groups, that has a lot of accountability, and then there is a whole separate set of rules for a political and corporate elite that doesn't want to be bound by such petty things as accountability."

This is no mere populist anti-elistist posturing. Reynolds and Rasmussen base their analysis on the idea that self-governance is not simply about how we pick presidents, senators, mayors, and so forth. It goes to the basic concept underlying our society, which is that we are freedom to live our lives without government interference, but there are all kinds of accountability measures built into our system.

As Rasmussen points out, the traditional understanding is that a business that does well by serving its customers prospers, while the business that doesn't, goes out of business. But when the political and business elites get together, they use tax dollars to bail out failing businesses and establish regulatory regimes to prop them up, keep out competitors, and insure continued revenues.

That way, the political elites get more power and jobs, while the corporate elite gets more income and "market stability." Another word for this arrangement is spelled C-O-N.

Rasmussen's new book: In Search of Self-Governance. Glenn's earlier, related piece, "Consent of the governed -- and the lack thereof":

Not long ago, the federal government enjoyed a stellar reputation for honesty and competence. Now, according to a recent CNN poll, three-quarters of Americans think federal officials aren't honest . (There's no separate survey here on what the "political class" thinks, but I suspect that its numbers would be sunnier, but still appalling, as above). So what do we do with a federal government that many voters think is illegitimate and dishonest?

Well, the Declaration of Independence allows for the prospect of altering or abolishing the government we have in order to get a government that's closer to what we want. That needn't involve anything as violent as the American Revolution or the Civil War, but the need for change -- real, structural change as opposed to campaign-slogan "change" -- is becoming more obvious.

In the past, America has managed to reinvent itself without transformations as wrenching as the Civil War or the Revolution. As the legitimacy of our current arrangements becomes increasingly threadbare, it is perhaps worth thinking about how this might be accomplished again.

What gets me is people who are offended by the Tea Parties. I find dissent against government, no matter whether I agree with those dissenting, highly patriotic and an essential element of democracy.

I'd love to see heads roll every time that happens. It won't. Not until we all refuse to elect only fiscally responsible legislators, who get as irate as I do at government waste.

Loved this suggestion from the witty Andrew Malcolm (@latimestot) at the LA Times (which he, by the way, tweeted, along with this link):

Imagine a fed govt msg of 140 chars max; GSA official sez fed Tweets advisable

People don't just blame technology for social problems, they idealize living without it. The more high-tech and complex our world gets, the more people tend to romanticize "the simple life." Now, maybe you're a better person if you live in a cabin in the woods with no TV, electricity, or running water -- or maybe you're Ted Kaczynski. Kacynzski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber," now lives in more modern surroundings -- a federal prison where he's serving a life sentence for maiming and murdering numerous people to sound the alarm about the "tyranny" of a high-tech society.

We have a tendency to get all misty-eyed about early men and women, painting them as "noble savages," living in Bambi-like harmony with nature while selflessly looking out for each other. The reality? They had the same genetically programmed tendencies to lie, sneak, steal, cheat and behave like thoughtless buttwads that we do today. But, back then, being seen as greedy or narcissistic or being caught scamming another member of your band could get you voted out of the cave and forced to go it alone -- very likely a death sentence in an environment not exactly rife with Motel 6's and 7-Elevens.

Steven Pinker, too, dispels the myths about how wonderful our ancestors were, in this TED video:

A critical mass of the "social justice" folks are realizing that the unions have been taking them to the cleaners for a generation. For decades, the unions have screamed about how schools are desperately underfunded and they need more money. For decades, the social justice folks bought this story and put themselves on the line to extract more taxpayer money for schools. For decades, the school-monopoly blob absorbed the money and nothing got any better.

The social justice folks are wise to this now. And they're not happy about it.

I can't see into Obama's mind. But the way things look from where I sit, this is the parsimonious explanation that covers all the facts. Obama realizes that the social justice folks are angry at the unions, and he wants to position himself to benefit from that.

For years well-endowed women have struggled with a lack of support from major retailers.

Now, finally, one department store is stocking bras large enough for even the most bountiful bosom.

Selfridges is selling a K-cup brassiere made by luxury brand Fantasie. The £32 model was previously only available at specialist outlets.

Each cup of the K bra measures one and a half foot at its widest part. In total, it is over 4ft in circumference.

It uses extra-thick straps with three hooks to ensure the required level of support.

Lingerie industry experts have dubbed the products 'wind socks' because they are so large.

They would be too big even for former page three model Katie Price, whose
breasts peaked at 32FF before she had reduction surgery.

But they still wouldn't be big enough for 27-year-old Donna Jones from Milton Keynes who claims to have Britain's biggest breasts, sized 40M.

Fantasie said 10,000 women have already bought the K- cup bra from specialist stores.

Commenters on the DM site recommended Bravissimo. Me? I like Empreinte. Expensive, but worth it ("The elasticity of Empreinte bras is reduced to 30%, instead of 50% for a standard strap. This specific elasticity guarantees a longer life for the bra.")

And wisely pointed out in the article:

Many women underestimate their cup size and go for a higher back size. A woman should ideally be measured every two years and more frequently if she has lost or gained weight or had a baby.

Big boobs in the US seem to mean a back like a longshoreman -- or, perhaps that thinking by customers drives what the industry produces and sells. I discovered that I actually wear a 30 back (80 in France), with, um, rather large cups. Figuring that out meant bras that fit. Finally. No more 34-anything.

Thanks, Jay J. Hector!

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term "separation between church and state.")

When the recorded voice comes on, I typically say "fuck you," "shit," "motherfucker" -- even if I'm not mad, which I usually am, when I have to call -- because that seems to trigger something in their software that puts you right through to an operator.

What really annoys me is when I have to punch in my number and other information only to be forced to re-give it to the person on the phone. Every time, at some companies (it's not like it's a glitch).

And then there are the record-a-lies, meant to placate me while I'm waiting on the phone for 20 minutes, about how much the company values my business, blah blah blah. If my call were "very important" to you, you'd have a goddamn human on the phone relatively pronto, and without making me go through sixteen forms of tele-acrobatics.

On a related note, I got an e-mail from a suicidal guy the other day. I ended up getting his number and calling him (as I will do with people who write me that they're suicidal), but he wrote in his e-mail that he couldn't get through on the suicide hotline. I'm imagining something along these lines:

Your call is very important to us. We're experiencing a heavy call volume. Please don't jump.

I got him the number of another suicide hotline, of course, just in case. And, things seem under control. Beyond the stuff I said, sometimes, I think it makes enough of a difference, knowing that there's a stranger out there who cares enough that you won't kill yourself that they'll pick up the phone and call you to ask you to stay alive.

Oh, and if you're in Tucson, Elmore Leonard's session is 10 am on Saturday, and mine's 10 am on Sunday, and lots of cool authors are here, like my friend Lenore Skenazy, author of Free Range Kids (the book and the blog).

"I don't like regulations," says Amy Alkon, a syndicated advice columnist who blogs daily at AdviceGoddess.com. "I like to shame people into behaving better."

Could there be...another explanation?

Like, say, that there are more white people than black people, and people tend to buy their children dolls that look like them?

Meaning that maybe not as many black mommies were buying the dolls, and when things don't move in retail, they price 'em to move. (photo here)

Story on ABCNews.com. Alice Gomstyn writes:

A Walmart spokeswoman, who could not verify the exact store shown in the photo, said that the price change on the Teresa doll was part of the chain's efforts to clear shelf space for its new spring inventory.

"To prepare for (s)pring inventory, a number of items are marked for clearance, " spokeswoman Melissa O'Brien said in an e-mail. "... Both are great dolls. The red price sticker indicates that this particular doll was on clearance when the photo was taken, and though both dolls were priced the same to start, one was marked down due to its lower sales to hopefully increase purchase from customers."

"Pricing like items differently is a part of inventory management in retailing," O'Brien said.

But critics say Walmart should have been more sensitive in its pricing choice.

"The implication of the lowering of the price is that's devaluing the black doll," said Thelma Dye, the executive director of the Northside Center for Child Development, a Harlem, N.Y. organization founded by pioneering psychologists and segregation researchers Kenneth B. Clark and Marnie Phipps Clark.

"While it's clear that's not what was intended, sometimes these things have collateral damage," Dye said.

Other experts agree. Walmart could have decided "that it's really important that we as a company don't send a message that we value blackness less than whiteness," said Lisa Wade, an assistant sociology professor at Occidental College in Los Angeles and the founder of the blog Sociological Images.

Oh, please. It's retailing, lady. You want to send coded messages through doll purchases, get a bunch of people to go buy up all the black dolls, and it'll be the white ones that get marked down.

A few remarks from the comments on ABC. First, this one:

What is the probem. I am a black-american with 2 daughters. If I could find the dolls marked down I would by a couple of them. With so much else going on in the world is this really a controversy???? Maybe I am missing the point.!!!!!

Another comment:

I have a 3 year old daughter that loves Barbie...ALL BARBIES. Her 4th birthday is coming up and it is all about Barbie. In this case, she would have chosen the light skinned Barbie over the dark skinned Barbie simply because she had the PINK outfit on. If the dark skinned Barbie had the pink outfit on, then she would have chosen her. Does product selection always have to be about race?

For me, it was always about hair color. I had Raggedy Ann & Andy because they were the only dolls that looked like me. (I had a little black beady eyes and a red button nose as a child.)

On Thursday, a day after the Itawamba County school board did just that, the 18-year-old lesbian high school senior reluctantly returned to campus to some unfriendly looks, she said.

"Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'" McMillen said.

The district announced Wednesday it wouldn't host the April 2 prom. The decision came after the American Civil Liberties Union demanded that officials change a policy banning same-sex prom dates because it violated students' rights. And the ACLU said the district not letting McMillen wear a tuxedo violated her free expression rights.

Which high school student goes to prom with which high school student is the school's business why?

Thanks, Patrick

It's why the regular Sunday New York Times Weddings piece on some couple that (typically) couldn't stand each other at first, but finally came together, is like The Superbowl for girls.

And, by the way, I think that longing for a great romantic story make women -- some women -- act needier when dating, wanting to see what's maybe not there, wanting things to happen to fast.

In these cases, guys have a tendency to get overwhelmed and beat it.

Also, it's no fun to chase someone who's already thrown herself at you.