The pride of the University of Montana.

Jane Brody reminds UD to mention that the magazine of New Yorker cartoons she read on her flight to Phoenix featured at least six cartoons whose punch line depended on the fact that zillions of Americans are taking antidepressants.

And the next edition of the DSM will guarantee that the few of us left in this country who are not dependent on these pills will soon be taken into the fold.

“He (Gingrich) said, ‘You know and I know that she’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,'” [Leonard] Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for [his first] divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich’s first congressional campaigns.

Lee Hausner, a California-based psychologist who works with the ultrarich, has one client she calls “The Phoenix,” a real-estate developer and investor who borrowed and spent heavily. He has surged and crashed twice over the past decade, reaching a net worth of $400 million, losing it, then hitting $200 million and losing it again.

“He’s an impulsive risk-taker,” she says. “He always lays everything on the line.”

For risk-takers who want to get rich and stay rich, Ms. Hausner advises taking a step back every so often and evaluating important decisions rather than leaving them to impulse.

“Some of these people roll the dice and they get rich,” she says. “But they have to realize that if they roll it again, the result may not come out as well. They need to stop themselves before they roll again, and deliberate.”

Noting that there were reporters in the room, [the judge] read Doyle’s rap sheet into the record, including his convictions for stealing a BMW, posing as a furrier to swipe a woman’s mink coat for “cleaning,” impersonating a Secret Service agent and repeatedly violating probation.

————————————-

Doyle has [also] spent time in prison for stealing a bronze Degas sculpture by posing as a member of an art-collecting family, pilfering books from the art library at the University of Kansas, and filching jewelry from a Tennessee woman.

Cantor fled from protestors at the University of Pennsylvania, but gave the speech at UD‘s college, Northwestern. After the speech he was rapidly moved out via the back of the building by security guards (too many protestors out front).

As to the substance of the speech:

“We should want all people to be moving up and no one to be pulled down,” Cantor concludes. Well, yes, we should want that to happen, because wanting people to fail isn’t very nice. But unless we all live in Lake Wobegon (where the children are all “above average”) uniform upward mobility isn’t actually possible. The thing about mobility is that people have to move up and people have to move down.

Cantor’s income inequality solution is to elevate all of the bottom 99 percent in incomes up to the top 1 percent. That would shut up the Occupy Wall Street crowd for sure! A more practical solution–and one that doesn’t violate the laws of mathematics–would be to encourage mobility, by all means (the U.S. has actually fallen behind most of western Europe in this regard) but also to pay close attention to what happens to the people who don’t make it to the top. The bottom 99 percent contribute to prosperity too, and lately they haven’t had much to show for it. Cantor seems not in the slightest bit curious as to how that happened.

Yet another generous insider trader causes a bit of embarrassment for an institution he endowed.

His lawyer says that systematically robbing the system by taking advantage of a position of trust is “in no way indicative of [the] overall character” of Donald Johnson. But heck. I dunno.

Q: What is the overarching theme in all of your books, and philosophy about life?

A: Happiness. I can define it in a thousand different ways. I knew if I could talk about happiness, then everything else would fall into place. When I tried to write about this 10 years ago, publishers turned me down. I was so ahead of my time.

… Anna Nicole, based on the life of Anna Nicole Smith:

[Can] a piece that celebrates the vacuity of contemporary American life – and to a depressing extent, our own – …rise above vacuity itself?

A parade up the Royal Mile will mark the 300th anniversary of the birth of philosopher David Hume.

Hundreds are expected to march from the Scottish Parliament to the statue of Hume opposite St Giles’ Cathedral as part of “The March to Enlightenment” on April 23 – three days before Hume’s birthday.

… Costumed characters representing Hume and other key Enlightenment figures will lead the procession.

Edinburgh Evening News

The University Child Development School, a private elementary school, sits directly across the street from Jiggles.

The Jewish Week is unhappy with something Henry Kissinger said in 1973 to Richard Nixon — a comment now made public by the Nixon Library.

The emigration of Jews from the Soviet Union is not an objective of American foreign policy. And if they put Jews into gas chambers in the Soviet Union, it is not an American concern. Maybe a humanitarian concern.

The ADL, though, doesn’t mind.

Hitchens.

The Wall Street Journal reviews a new anthology of parodies. Here’s a nice one, a take on Sumer Is Icumen In:

Plumber is icumen in;
Bludie big tu-du.
Bloweth lampe and showeth dampe.
And dripth the wud thru.
Bludie hel, boo-hoo!

Fields was the third witness to testify that he had sex with Sypher while she was married to her second husband, Tim Sypher, Pitino’s former equipment manager who now runs the YUM! Center.

Good piece in the Guardian about the melancholy long withdrawing roar of sex from British novels. “[N]o one [is] writing much about sex any more.”

Some people blame it on the annual, hilarious Bad Sex Award, pantingly chronicled on this blog year after year. Writers live in dread of it.

Some say it’s a generational thing, with ‘sixties people (Martin Amis, for instance) still into it, but younger types bored.

I dunno. I doubt it’s even much of a trend.

But the article cites an exchange from the Lady Chatterley obscenity trial that UD very much likes. The author of the essay quotes from Kenneth Tynan’s reporting from the proceedings fifty years ago:

“[The crucial incident of the trial] occurred on the third morning during the testimony of Richard Hoggart,” [Tynan] observed, “who had called Lawrence’s novel ‘puritanical’. Mr Hoggart is a short, dark, young Midlands teacher of immense scholarship and fierce integrity. From the witness box he uttered a word that we had formerly heard only on the lips of [prosecutor] Mr Griffith-Jones; he pointed out how Lawrence had striven to cleanse it of its furtive, contemptuous and expletive connotations, and to use it ‘in the most simple, natural way: one fucks’. There was no reaction of shock in the court, so calmly was the word pronounced, and so literally employed.

“‘Does it gain anything,’ he was asked, ‘by being printed f-?’ ‘Yes,’ said Mr Hoggart, ‘it gains a dirty suggestiveness’.”