Wednesday morning roundup

Y'all know how I feel (well, think) about Tom Friedman (more often than not recycles the same handful of ideas, but occasionally really hits the spot)... but do pay attention when he writes about the Middle East, because his understanding is deep. "Beirut and Jerusalem" was his "Omnivore's Dilemma," i.e. an actually researched, profound, informative book. The analogy being that both he and Michael Pollan have gone on to right fluff that an eighth grader could put together (I mean, food rules? really?). But I digress. I take no issues with what Tom Friedman says here about Egypt, but I'm wary of the qualified analogy to China, i.e. China restricts political freedom but at least offers young people an economic future. Yes and no. China has more educated young people that it can employ outside of factories and farms, and they don't want to work at factories or farms like their parents did (or still do). I keep reading these one-sentence references to the China contrast, and I ask you to take it with a grain of salt, because it's not really substantiated.

Michael Gerson explores the potential politics of Catholicism. On more personal aspects of Catholicism: an iPhone app for your sins.

Don't mess with nursing mothers. I see this as a win-win: maybe people will stay and check out the Hirshhorn's collections, which are awesome. And, as suggested at the end of the article, let's hope we get some inspired art out of the situation.

You're not imagining things: metro escalators are malfunctioning in record proportions.

***
I watched the extraordinary and thought-provoking docudrama, "Endgame," yesterday (it was shown at work). A young(er) Thabo Mbeke was a central figure in the theme (as he was a central figure in the negotiations to end Apartheid), and I'm not sure whether it was sad or inspiring to revisit that heroic side of him, after his shot at governing. I mean, nobody's perfect, and revolutionary leaders often do not make good political leaders, but what's striking about Mbeke's case--let's move this closer to home, away from potential Egypt parallels--is how his denial of basic science was disastrous for his country. Would it have made a difference in South Africa if he'd embraced the link between HIV and AIDS? How can a leader deny that, all while watching a disease devastate his country? And yet, check out the climate denialism in our country. The consequences could be even more tragic, irreversible. Doesn't it infuriate you?