The great 'nor'easter' debate -- truly finis: One last post on the 'nor'easter' vs. 'NORTHeaster' debate. Thanks to the intrepid research of Dr. Universal Hub and Prof. Reader No. 1, Hub Blog's testy suggestion that 'nor'easter' was a mere recent invention has been blown out of the water. But here's the statistical proof, via Adam's comment page, that the media indeed has glommed onto the word in recent years, wrongly making it look like it was a previously widely used word in New England: "From 1975 to 1980, journalists used the nor'easter spelling only once in five mentions of such storms; in the past year (2003), more than 80 percent of northeasters were spelled nor'easter. It's no more authentic than 'nucular' for nuclear or 'bicep' for biceps, but it would take a mighty wind, at this point, to blow nor'easter back into oblivion."



The great torture debate -- also finis (or should be): Backpeddling a bit, Glenn links to this 'non-hysterical and well-documented' post about the torture issue. So, please, no more talk about how torture hasn't happened. It did. In multiple places. By many different intelligence and military personnel. Twenty-seven murders. Much higher homicide percentage than within the U.S. prison system. ... Great quote: "Torture doesn't simply, oops, 'just happen.' " ... Another great point: "Moving forward, what do we do about it?" ...

I guess Glenn's post is his way of saying that those who allegedly engaged in hysteria and poor documentation might have been more right than those who regularly chose to stick their heads in the sand.



'The EU will muddle on ...': Hub Blog actually thought that at the last moment the French would vote 'oui' on the EU referendum, confounding the CW of the past week, not that I wanted the CW of the past week to be proven wrong. ... Anyway, here's an interesting political analysis from the UK, pointing out how the French 'non' vote also puts Tony Blair on the defensive, though not nearly as much as M. Chirac. ...  ¶ 6:22 AM