After the bizarre kabuki debate (see here and here) in which David Brooks, Paul Krugman, and Bob Herbert all wrote New York Times op-eds about Ronald Reagan’s 1980 speech in Philadelphia, MS without making clear that they were debating each other, it’s great to see Slate publishing a critique of Will Saletan’s awful race and intelligence series and the Washington Post allowing two scientists to rebut Charles Krauthammer’s misleading claims about stem cell research. In both cases, the articles are much more informative and engaging because they can offer specific critiques of their opponents rather than vague attacks on straw men. More please!