| |
 |
Wednesday, November 03, 2004 |
Smart drugs are back
Smart drugs are back: " The Economist on new smart drugs:
At least 40 potential cognitive enhancers are currently in clinical development, says Harry Tracy, publisher of NeuroInvestment, an industry newsletter based in Rye, New Hampshire. Some could reach the market within a few years. For millions, these breakthroughs could turn out to be lifesavers or, at the very least, postpone the development of a devastating disease. In America alone, there are currently about 4.5m people suffering from Alzheimer's disease, and their ranks are expected to grow to 6m by 2020. Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), defined as memory loss without any significant functional impairment, is estimated to afflict at least another 4.5m people. Because the majority of MCI patients will eventually develop Alzheimer's, many doctors believe that intervening in the early stages of the disease could significantly delay its onset.
Link (via R.U. Sirius). "
(Via Technoccult.)
8:55:23 PM Permalink
|
|
religious revival?
religious revival?: "SLOW DOWN THERE....This, with apologies to Andrew, is hooey. "What we're seeing," writes Andrew Sullivan, "is a huge fundamentalist Christian revival in this country, a religious movement that is now explicitly political as well." Hate to point this out (no,..."
(Via Political Animal.)
Nice little post. There isn't anything new here. It's time for the religious left to mobilize. When I think of the religious, I'd rather think of Marin Luther King than Pat Robertson.
8:39:50 PM Permalink
|
|
The Plot Against America
Last week I read this terrific Philip Roth novel, The Plot Against America. An alternate history, it tells the story of Roth's own family in an America where there's one crucial change from what really happened. The 1940 Republican convention is deadlocked in the middle of the night, and in walks Charles Lindbergh, who gives a rousing speech, and is garners the nomination for president. Running as the Peace Candidate, who promises, unlike Roosevelt, no European War, he is elected. Lindbergh was something of a Nazi sympathizer, and as president he does indeed keep the country out of the war, and goes further, making a pact with Hitler. The book shows how Roth's family reacts to the rising tide of anti-semitism in Newark, and your American nightmare starts to come true. It's an amazing book; vividly realized and harrowing. Tonight I feel not unlike Roth's father feels the night of Lindbergh's election. Not, to be sure, that Bush is any kind of Nazi sympathizer, but Roth made the situation so real and so organic to America. Oddly enough, it's a hopeful book -- this didn't actually happen, of course. I haven't read enough Roth, and need to change that. This book is highly recommended.
7:44:20 PM Permalink
|
|
Only a Pawn in Their Game
A South politician preaches to the poor white man,
"You got more than the blacks, don't complain.
You're better than them, you been born with white skin," they explain.
And the Negro's name
Is used it is plain
For the politician's gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.
Of course, Bob nailed it, 30 years ago. It's the same game today. Don't worry about the economy, don't worry about your kids dying in a war, just worry about them gays trying to marry.
7:28:29 PM Permalink
|
|
Quote of the day
Quote of the day: "Jim Kuntsler says it all:
We couldn't form a plausible opposition to those who act as if the future doesn't exist.
Or, if you prefer, Adlai Stevenson said it all when, at an event during the 1956 Presidential campaign, a woman shouted, "You have the vote of every thinking person!" Stevenson shouted back, "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!""
(Via rc3.org Daily.)
10:40:25 AM Permalink
|
|
Reap the Whirlwind?
"Those who sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind” (Hosea 8:7).
A couple months ago the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial by Niall Ferguson to the effect that the party who won this election would be sorry in the long term. I've mentioned this before, but in some ways (well, not the Supreme Court or the environment), this may be better in the long run. Certainly Bush and the Republican House and Senate have created a cluster of problems.
Iraq will be very difficult, if not impossible to resolve, and there is a whole cluster of problems around that, such as the over extension of the military -- what is Bush going to do in the next year when people need to be rotated out? Keep them there anyway? Continue stop loss? And what happens if we have a big problem in Iran or North Korea or Taiwan? Where are we going to get the troops? On the other hand, I've always thought a bit that Bush might be able to get us out quicker than Kerry -- one of the things we should have done in Vietnam in 1968 or so was just declare victory and leave. With his well-known ability to assert realities that simply aren't there, Bush will probably have an easier time of doing this than Kerry will. And that's probably the only way to get out.
Then there's the deficit. Even in the bizzarro world they live in, the Republicans are going to have to recognize that the massive deficits they are creating are a disaster in the making. And there are only three ways to solve the deficit: raise taxes, cut spending, or grow the economy. So far, they haven't exactly been masters of creating a booming economy. Nor have they been able to bite the bullet and cut spending. Or raise taxes. What are they going to do?
Of course, there's no reason to think they'll really do anything about the deficit. They're proven themselves so far pretty good at pushing current problems to our kids.
10:27:44 AM Permalink
|
|
How discouraging
How damned discouraging last night was. (Not the least because one of the damned pieces of software I'm using for this thing apparently lost a post I wrote late about it.) To me the most discouraging thing about it is what it bodes for future elections. The Republicans preyed on fears -- of wolves, the terrorists, gays, banning bibles, and more -- instead of hopes and dreams. Bush offered no clear plan for what he's going to do with the next four years, except continue to not pay the bills. It's really discouraging how few of the young voted -- and they're the ones who are going to have to pay those bills for the next several decades. I remember doing to Olympia when I was in high school and lobbying to lower the voting age to 18, and how excited I was to be able to vote in 1972 (though that started an unfortunate trend of being on the "wrong" side of these elections); I'm very proud that both my voting-age sons exercised their responsibility.
So what do we get for the next four years? Another war, simply moving these troops somewhere else? Bigger and bigger deficits? Bigotry enshrined in the Constitution? More secrecy as a modus operandi of government? 250 more vacation days for Bush? How many more dead in Iraq and elsewhere? Nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea? A flu epidemic? More terrorists joining up with Bin Laden?
But, heck, I guess we won't have to worry about the wolves.
8:54:53 AM Permalink
|
|
© Copyright 2004 Steve Michel.
|
|
|
|
|
