SeniorJunior

Read (beg, borrow or steal) the Opinion piece in yesterdays [4-23-07] Wall Street Journal (my favorite newspaper) by Jonathan Kellerman called Bedlam revisited . (subscription) It's dynamite. And it has an absolutely terrifying illustration by David Klein. I was moved to write a letter to the editor about it. Of course the odds of getting a letter published in the WSJ are pretty skinny. The nice thing about having a blog, is that I can publish my letter! So here 'tis... Letter to The Editor The biggest question raised by Jonathan Kellerman’s powerful “Bedlam Revisited” is this: Can our country reverse a truly monumental mistake? When “institutionalization” morphed into “community psychology” in a few short years, and we quickly developed the witches brew of mass homelessness as Kellerman notes, and prisons full of psychotics, there was not so much as a “woops” from the political class. Huge mistake? What mistake? We had several recent instances here in Albuquerque in w

Inject this , anti-universal-health-care people! The most common argument from the right wing “free market” health care advocates is “just look at Canada.” Well a big, well-designed research project (I should know – 30 years owning a market research company) did just that. Guess what? Canadians spend half as much per capita and get the same or better results as the U.S.A. See an abstract of the study at: http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/8/1 Here’s a press summary from The Toronto Star : Apr 17, 2007; Anne-Marie Tobin; Canadian press "In looking at patients in Canada with a specific diagnosis compared to Americans with the same diagnosis, in Canada patients had at least as good an outcome as their American counterparts – and in many situations, a better health outcome," said one of the 17 authors, Dr. P.J. Devereaux, a cardiologist and clinical epidemiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton. "And that is important because in the United States, they'

Shameless Plug If you want to read about the game, I mean deep into the psychology, the philosophy and the priapsis of golf, aim your browser (consider the wind) toward http://bogiejohnson.blogspot.com/ and have a giggle along with your new driving-chipping-putting-betting insights. Sam Johnson (NO one calls him "Bogie" to his face) is an old bud of mine. And I do mean old. You can read some of his stuff at www.tees2greens.com - he's one of their "5 star" columnists - but it's easier to read his blog, navigation-wise. Have fun.

Starvation by Biofuels Ah, the absolute certainty of the Law of Unintended Consequences. In a nutshell: Food prices are rising because – surprise! – the demand for corn, soy and sugarcane/beets to make ethanol and biodiesel is driving up the cost of these basic food commodities. Quoting from The Wall Street Journal (my favorite newspaper): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117608539258763747.html?mod=world_news_whats_news Soaring prices for farm goods, driven in part by demand for crop-based fuels, are pushing up the price of food world-wide and unleashing a new source of inflationary pressure. The rise in food prices is already causing distress among consumers in some parts of the world -- especially relatively poor nations like India and China. If the trend gathers momentum, it could contribute to slower global growth by forcing consumers to spend less on other items or spurring central banks to fight inflation by raising interest rates. …And, on the more human side:

The mighty Wall Street Journal (my favorite newspaper) has been hopping with pot talk lately. What's the Voice of Capitalism coming to? It started with an editorial page commentary on March 16 by constitutional expert Randy E. Barnett called "Reefer Madness". It was a learned assessment by Professor Barnett on how the federal courts go through constitutional contortions in maintaining the prohibition on medical uses of marijuana. The commentary was keyed by the Angel Raich story. On March 23 there were four letters in response. If you are a Journal reader, you know that's a lot for any one commentary, meaning there were probably hundreds that didn't get printed. There were letters from organizations "Common Sense for Drug Policy" and "Marijuana Policy Project" decrying criminalization of a useful drug. President Carter's drug czar Lee Dogoloff weighed in - saying "every major" scientist says there is no medical benefit. Ol

I want a follow-up story! As the Washington Post reported today (March 23 - 07) the Democratic members of the Federal Election Commission say the Bushies cheated us taxpayers on how they accounted for their expenditure of public money. The Republican members of the commission say "did not." An excerpt: "We had a disagreement on this audit, and it was a doozy," said one of the Democrats, Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub. The dispute centered on the use of what the commissioners called "hybrid" ads, which were intended to promote both the president and Republican members of Congress. The Bush campaign argued that it should not bear the full cost of these ads, so it split the tab with the Republican Party. As a result, only half of the cost would count toward spending limits imposed on the campaign when it agreed to take public funds. Weintraub said the spending limit is an essential part of the agreement candidates make to accept public financing.

I notice I've been grousing a lot on the old blog lately. Time - sez I to myself - to write something uplifting, or at least useful. Vacation time is just around the corner. So here: Don’t Deny the Devil There are certain things in the making of recreational choices that color one’s judgment, like a well-tinted pair of sunglasses can make a day look more glamorous than it really is, or a quickly drained dram of tequila can have the same effect on a candidate for social intercourse. The hint of danger is one of those “certain things.” Hints of danger have various thresholds for individuals. Popping one’s ‘chute a thousand feet closer to the ground than usual might hint of danger to a jaded skydiver making the experience beguiling recreation. To the rest of us there are usually less well-defined danger hints. Just considering that hit of tequila, for instance, puts some people off as being ‘way over the limit, fully into danger.’ Depends on your age sometimes

In today’s Washington Post, Susan Jacoby reviews Stephen Prothero’s book Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know -- And Doesn't (HarperSanFrancisco, 2007). Here are a couple of mind boggling excerpts: Americans are … the most religiously ignorant people in the Western world. Fewer than half of us can identify Genesis as the first book of the Bible, and only one third know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount. Approximately 75 percent of adults, according to polls cited by Prothero, mistakenly believe the Bible teaches that "God helps those who help themselves." More than 10 percent think that Noah's wife was Joan of Arc. Only half can name even one of the four Gospels, and -- a finding that will surprise many -- evangelical Christians are only slightly more knowledgeable than their non-evangelical counterparts. Check it out: http://www.bu.edu/religion/faculty/bios/prothero.html And… http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/

I had a powerful deja vu experience this evening. On PBS Fareed Zacharia was interviewing Professor Shibley Telhami , holder of the the Anwar Sadat Chair at the University of Maryland about the new Zogby Poll on Arab attitudes and opinions. (Telhami designed the questionnaire and analyzed the results.) As you might expect, the good old U.S. of A. doesn't fare too well. G.W. Bush is by far the "most disliked" world leader among Arabs of all stripes. He far surpasses the traditional winner, whoever was the current leader of Israel. In fact, Bush beats the combination of Olmert and Sharon. Professor Telhami noted that the polarization against America has become the driving force uniting Arabs, Shiite, Sunni, et al. The main reason the Arabs admire anyone (including their # 3 favorite world leader Hugo Chavez ) is that they stand up to America. In these powerful findings from a well designed scientific poll there is strong guidance about what's wrong with our c

Here's another brilliant idea from the W. Bush- leaguers . Make up for the billions blitzed on Iraq and the further billions foregone in the upper crust tax cuts by selling off big pieces of our national forests! Did you hear about that? Probably not unless you are in a Knight Ridder Publishing city. Note: Published on Friday, February 10, 2006 by Knight Ridder Bush Administration Moves to Sell National Forest Land by Seth Borenstein Feb 10... and very little national pick-up of the story. I found it because one of Netscape's newshounds noticed it on CommonDreams .Org and posted it yesterday. The full story is at: www.netscape.com today (Sunday 2-25-07) Here are a few excerpts: WASHINGTON - The Bush administration will unveil a proposal Friday to sell up to 200,000 acres of national forest land in "isolated parcels" ranging from a quarter of an acre to 200 acres, much of it in California. "I am outraged, and I don't think the public is

I had never seen the political cartoon showing George W. holding a homeless "will work for food" type sign saying "Will Kill For Oil" until today. It illustrates a powerful argument against the standard Cheney- esque position about Iraq. It's all in a great blog I just discovered http://www.theoildrum.com/ Please check it out (even though my blogging skills make you have to paste the URL in your browser). Briefly put: "The idea is that, although Bush was wrong to get us into this war, we are there and we cannot simply pull our troops out. If we do so, then Iraq will collapse into civil war and Iran could very well take over the whole country, including its oilfields." Those are Allen Pfiefer's (the blogmeister ) words. His concise rebuttal goes like this: "This seems plausible. But when you look closely at this argument, you will see that there is nothing to support it other than the delusion that the US is fighting the good fight.

How much can they screw up? Let me count the ways. Even a news hog like me can miss an important apple now and then. The one I missed this time was how our new Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is apparently trying to re-light the cold war flames. Brilliant! I've missed all the tension about imminent nuclear conflagration. It sort of keeps the worry about imminent terrorist attacks in perspective. Just putting some of our flawed "missile defense shield" in ex-Soviet countries in Eastern Europe was enough to crank up the Russian defense spending. Check this paragraph from the Feb 9 edition of the British Guardian Limited http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2009339,00.html In his speech to Russia's parliament, Mr Ivanov (Russia's hawkish defence minister, Sergei Ivanov) announced that the military would get 17 ballistic missiles this year, compared with an average of four in recent years. The plan envisages the deployment of 34 new silo-based Topol-M missil