Speaking of yesterday's Times, let's detour for a moment to the op-ed page. We've said this before, and we're sure we'll say it again: It's not just that Bruce McCall isn't funny; it's that we don't even understand how he's supposed to be funny in the first place. Can someone explain what was thought to be either entertaining or argumentative or simply informative in yesterday's op-art? We long ago gave up.
The Price of Emission [NYT]