WE ONCE MET A WAITRESS WHO DYED HER HAIR TO LOOK LIKE TAPESTRY: Colorist Dyes Hair to Look Like Warhol, van Gogh Masterpieces.

HOW MUCH DO YOUNG PEOPLE CARE FOR GRANDMA’S OPINION? Steinem, Albright Try Bullying Female Voters into Supporting Hillary.

LEARN TO TAKE A HIT: Cam Newton and the Agony of Defeat.

WHO CARES IF A FEW WINDOWS GET BROKEN: Mark-Viverito’s message: Only saps obey the law.

THE URGENCY OF GETTING HEALTH CARE TO THE POOREST AMONG US LEADS TO THIS: Government health insurance: the ultimate sickness.  And we had to pass it to see what was in it.  We see.  Now can we remove this craptastic mess from our public life and economy already.  (And the man in question is a friend of mine too, and we can’t do anything to help him.)

HIGHER EDUCATION IMPLOSION UPDATE: The fight for ‘tolerance’ at Rutgers hits a new low.

IF HE HAD A MIND, HE MIGHT BE DANGEROUS: David Brooks is still in love with the crease in Obama’s pants.

WHY  THE WEST: How many Troops are you willing to send to Syria?

YEP. Bernie Sanders’ Female Supporters Are Finally Getting A Taste Of Their Own ‘War On Women’ Medicine. “Whether they realize it or not, female Sanders supporters are pushing back on the very type of deliberately divisive and harmful rhetoric that has been used for decades by their fellow Democrats – male and female, young and old – against their political opponents in attempts to shame them and shut down the debate.”

FROM MARK RIPPETOE, a video on shoulder rehab.

ELIMINATIONIST RHETORIC, THE STAGE PLAY: ‘Killing Republicans’ musical to premiere, as Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Clinton campaign.

AT AMAZON, getcher Thermal Underwear right here.

Plus, up to 50% off Carhartt winter clothing for men, women, and kids.

And check out the Levi’s Spring Sale.

MY USA TODAY COLUMN: Socialism not as hot as its spokesman: The young voters flocking to Bernie Sanders may find his rebel status more alluring than his ideas.

BECAUSE SOMEBODY WAS WILLING TO BUY? “The CEO of Myspace tells us why he just sold the company to Time Inc“

THE NYT FILES A DUMB SUIT AGAINST A CRITIC: It’s the subject of my latest Bloomberg View column.

UPDATE from the comments: “A very important story being passed over by Instapundit readers. Image copyright trolling is the one remaining club against free speech.”

Also, for some tales from the crazy world of seeking photo reprint permissions, don’t miss the Pinterest board linked in the footnote.

AMAZING HOW WELL THIS WORKS: Google searches predicted New Hampshire primary results.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO WIENER: Florida PE teacher, 28, is fired for ‘sending nude Snapchat pictures and sexual messages to multiple students including members of the football team.’

TED CRUZ AD: Conservatives Anonymous.

MAYBE PEOPLE’S DIETS CONTAIN MORE L-SERINE NOW: Risk of dementia is declining, but scientists don’t know why.

Dementia is on the decline, with the risk of developing it dropping 20 percent per decade since the late 1970s, according to a striking new study published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

It’s a finding that may be hard to believe, with a tsunami of new dementia cases looming in the near future. By 2025, Alzheimer’s disease alone will rob 7.1 million people older than age 65 of their memories, their ability to function, their very personalities — a 40 percent increase from today. The Alzheimer’s Association has predicted that, by 2050, the disease will cost $1.1 trillion.

But both facts appear to be true. The aging of the baby boomers means that dementia cases will surge to an all-time high — the sheer number of older people who are living longer means that even a drop in the incidence of the disease won’t solve that problem, which will exact a huge health and financial toll. But despite the popular perception that getting old invariably means people go gray and begin to lose their memory, the new data strongly suggest that, over the past few decades, the risk of developing dementia has receded for people with at least a high school education, raising hope that it may be possible to prevent one of the scariest risks of aging.

But it’s probably something else, like fewer people smoking. But given my family history, I’ve started taking L-Serine on the off-chance that it might help and isn’t likely to do any harm.

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Here’s What to Do If Both Your Pilots Die on a 737.

AT AMAZON, coupon deals on Candy & Chocolate.

Plus, deals in Patio, Lawn & Garden. Despite the chill now, it’ll be summer before you know it.

Also, deals in Lingerie and Sleepwear.

‘IT’S LIKE THE DAY BEFORE WORLD WAR ONE’: EUROPEAN CHIEF’S STARK WARNING OVER SCALE OF REFUGEE CRISIS.

Don’t worry – I’m sure President Ash Carter is monitoring the situation carefully.

THE VIEW OF THE WORLD FROM 9th AVENUE: One fun element of Democrat presidential primaries? Reading how much leftwing elites truly despise the base of Democrat voters. As John Nolte writes today at Big Government, “Prominent Hillary Clinton Supporter Smears Working Class Dems as Racist:”

Obviously frustrated by Hillary Clinton’s collapsing presidential campaign (her second in a row!), The Nation’s Joan Walsh, a frequent MSNBC contributor and high-profile Hillary supporter, took to her verified Twitter account Thursday to attack working class Democrats as racists.

“I wonder if Clinton’s troubles with white working class,” Walsh mused, “which she carried in ’08, have anything to do with the president she served[.]”

The insinuation isn’t at all subtle. Walsh is suggesting that white working class Democrats have moved away from Hillary because she served in the cabinet of a black president.

This is a bizarre strategy from Team Hillary, especially after the catastrophic results from New Hampshire Tuesday night, where Hillary lost the woman vote to 195 year-old socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

It may be bizarre, but this is what Democrat elites do; in April of 2008, in the midst of Pennsylvania primary season, Obama-supporting screenwriter-director Nora Ephron (who passed away in 2012) took to the pages of the Huffington Post to write a nasty screed titled “White Men:”

This is an election about whether the people of Pennsylvania hate blacks more than they hate women. And when I say people, I don’t mean people, I mean white men. How ironic is this? After all this time, after all these stupid articles about how powerless white men are and how they can’t even get into college because of overachieving women and affirmative action and mean lady teachers who expected them to sit still in the third grade even though they were all suffering from terminal attention deficit disorder — after all this, they turn out (surprise!) to have all the power. (As they always did, by the way; I hope you didn’t believe any of those articles.)

To put it bluntly, the next president will be elected by them: the outcome of Tuesday’s primary will depend on whether they go for Hillary or Obama, and the outcome of the general election will depend on whether enough of them vote for McCain. A lot of them will: white men cannot be relied on, as all of us know who have spent a lifetime dating them. And McCain is a compelling candidate, particularly because of the Torture Thing. As for the Democratic hope that McCain’s temper will be a problem, don’t bet on it. A lot of white men have terrible tempers, and what’s more, they think it’s normal.

If Hillary pulls it out in Pennsylvania, and she could, and if she follows it up in Indiana, she can make a credible case that she deserves to be the candidate; these last primaries will show which of the two Democratic candidates is better at overcoming the bias of a vast chunk of the population that has never in its history had to vote for anyone but a candidate who could have been their father or their brother or their son, and who has never had to think of the president of the United States as anyone other than someone they might have been had circumstances been just slightly different.

Hillary’s case is not an attractive one, because what she’ll essentially be saying (and has been saying, although very carefully) is that she can attract more racist white male voters than Obama can. Nonetheless, and as I said, she has a case.

Classy stuff — which also reveals much about what Ephron thought about the people who paid to see her movies. In her column today (at Salon, where Joan Walsh served as editor for many years, ironically enough), Camille Paglia spots another leftist dowager (her word) lashing out at the base:

Despite emergency efforts by Gloria Steinem, the crafty dowager empress of feminism, to push a faltering Hillary over the finish line, Sanders overwhelmingly won women’s votes in every category except senior citizens. Last week, when she told TV host Bill Maher that young women supporting the Sanders campaign are just in it to meet boys, Steinem managed not only to insult the intelligence and idealism of the young but to vaporize every lesbian Sanders fan into a spectral non-person.

Steinem’s polished humanitarian mask had slipped, revealing the mummified fascist within. I’m sure that my delight was shared by other dissident feminists everywhere. Never before has the general public, here or abroad, more clearly seen the arrogance and amoral manipulativeness of the power elite who hijacked and stunted second-wave feminism.

Oh I don’t know – that sort of arrogance is on rather prominent display every four years. It’s as if Democrat elites believe that their base care for little more than clinging to their racism, sexism, guns and religion. (Obama’s infamous crack in 2008 was in the context of trying to win the same Pennsylvania Democratic primary that inspired Ephron’s racist “White Men” screed above.)

So why all the anger from leftist elites directed at their base? Perhaps it’s because, as Ace of Spades noted in 2011, “Our elites are fixated on how disappointed they are with the tawdry public precisely because that allows them to avoid examining their own colossal failures.”

COSMOPOLITAN MAGAZINE TO PARTNER WITH BLOOMBERG GROUP TO PROMOTE GUN CONTROL, invents moronic neologism “gunsplaining.”

Related: Nanny-tastic! Jim Geraghty shares the perfect campaign sticker for Michael Bloomberg.

THE GROWING STENCH OF CLINTON CORRUPTION: The Washington Post is reporting that the “Clinton Foundation Received Subpoena From State Department Investigators.”

Investigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking documents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it.

The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.

The full scope and status of the inquiry, conducted by the State Department’s inspector general, were not clear from the material correspondence reviewed by The Washington Post. . . .

The potential consequences of the IG investigation are unclear. Unlike federal prosecutors, inspectors general have the authority to subpoena documents without seeking approval from a grand jury or a judge.

But their power is limited. They are able to obtain documents, but they cannot compel testimony. At times, IG inquiries result in criminal charges, but sometimes they lead to administrative review, civil penalties or reports that have no legal consequences.