Actually I've made it before, but it's now clearer than ever -- in 2009, the Massachusetts attempt to provide universal health insurance coverage to its citizens [sic -- undocumented residents are screwed] is going to blow up like an unarmored humvee hitting a buried artillery shell.

Steffi and David, with colleague Benjamin Day, review the long sad history of failure of state level reform efforts, and they predict that Massachusetts is going to hit the wall because a) the so-called "affordable plan" that people with too much income to qualify for the subsidy have to buy is already unaffordable, and b) Massachusetts is going to lose the federal subsidy next year. Let me add to that:

I'm at the convention center in Mexico City, sitting up against a wall outside the hall where Bill Clinton just spoke, demonstrators to the right of me and to the left of me, huge throngs stepping over my legs. The conference organizers didn't do much to play up Clinton's talk -- you actually had to read the fine print in the program to find out when it was happening. Never fear, the big hall was packed, and rapt.

His words would have fallen harder on the world if he were President of the United States, of course, instead of just president of a foundation. But he's enormously respected around the world and as a matter of fact, I think most of the audience still thinks of him as PUSA.

One of my DFH characteristics is that I have not consumed the flesh of tetrapods since I was in college. It is not, however, because I believe it is morally wrong in principle for humans to eat meat. Biologically, we're omnivores, and animals eat each other. That's nature. No, it's because of the way meat is produced in our society. Here is an important report that has gotten far too little attention, called "Putting Meat on the Table: Industrial Animal Farm Production in America." It was produced through a grant from the Pew Charitable Trust, which created the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. Below the fold are some brief excerpts from the introduction. I wish I could present more, but do read the whole thing.

Two essays in the latest BMJ (sorry, subscription only -- it's the former British Medical Journal, for those who don't know) argue along rather similar lines that it is time for a substantial investment in biomedical research into slowing the aging process in humans. (Colin Farrelly authors one of them; a multitude led by Robert Butler of the International Longevity Center presents the other.)

Here is the problem, in a nutshell. Current efforts to combat the various diseases associated with aging, from cancer to heart disease to osteoporosis to Alzheimer's can have, at best, a limited payoff. However well you succeed in saving an old person from death from cancer, you won't gain a great deal in disability-free lifespan because by the time we hit our 70s, comorbidity is the rule. The person also has arthritis, heart disease, cognitive decline. One way to think of it is that these are not diseases of aging, they are aging.

One of the distinctions I make in my research on interpersonal communication is distinguishing between what we call "representatives," and "expressives." A representative is the kind of speech act that has traditionally been the most salient concern of linguistic philosophers,* that is an assertion which can be assigned a truth value based on a method of verification available to a set of beings with requisite sensory apparatus, logical processing capability, and opportunity for observation -- normally meaning cognitively and sensorily normal humans. Formally, positivists say that the meaning of a statement is equivalent to the means by which it can be verified.

What's not to love about a country that gave us fine chocolate, fondue, holey cheese, precision watches, leather pants, giant wooden trumpets, yodeling, sliding down mountainsides on various contrivances, a treacly shipwrecked family that inspired an iconic 60s sci-fi show, resolute neutrality, secret bank accounts for obscenely wealthy tax evaders, and Vatican guards in clown costumes?

But in spite of all these marvelous innovations, I do have a bone to pick with the land of melting ski resorts, and that is their health care system to which many an American wonk, including some of my best friends here in Massachusetts and the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, are looking for inspiration. The basic idea is, maybe it isn't perfect, but a) it's better than what we've got now and b) it just might be politically feasible. Yes, somewhat to point (a), but I've got a problem with (b).

Unlike the former Senator, I'm not a long-distance video diagnostician. Nevertheless, people importune me to opine on whether Sen. McCain is displaying early symptoms of dementia. Alright, enough, I will pronounce judgment.

No, I don't think so. The cognitive limitations Sen. McCain displays do not appear consistent with early stage Alzheimer's disease or frontotemporal dementia.

One of the most puzzling proclivities of humans throughout history has been widespread belief in the imminent destruction of the world, or perhaps a better word is fundamental transformation.  The belief is not in the end of existence, but in the extinction of familiar reality.  The new universe is generally to be some sort of paradise or divine kingdom, although typically only the chosen people -- and that means us, whoever it is who shares this belief -- will be around to enjoy it.  The rest will either be exterminated, or wallowing in hell.

The most widespread version of millenialism in the U.S. is of course the Christian fundamentalist version based on the biblical book called Revelation.  Chip Berlet and Nikhil Aziz discuss this belief system and its relationship to U.S. Middle East policy here.  It is downright horrifying that a powerful nation would be influenced in matters of war and peace by a delusional movement that places no value whatever on human life or even the continuation of civilization, on the premise that the known universe is about to end, but that is indeed the case.

Says Rick Shenkman.  Well, okay, maybe you're an exception, but most Americans ignorance of history, civics, and political issues is absolutely appalling.  Shenkman doesn't get into other areas, such as science -- actually Europeans aren't all that scientifically literate either but at least more than half of them believe in evolution.  I'm having a hard time getting used to the finding that 25% of Americans believe that the sun revolves around the earth, and that 35% believe that astrology is "sort of scientific" (whatever that means).  

Otherwise it would be known as the teethbrush.  (Before you start composing the hate mail, you should know that we have a tradition in Massachusetts and New Hampshire of insulting each other. It's okay, they're still Sox fans and we still go skiing.)

I'm planning to have big fun this afternoon getting endodontic therapy, popularly known as a root canal.  This will be my third, which leads me to reflect that one of the particularly unintelligent aspects of our design is that the teeth just aren't built to last a lifetime.  Here's some info from the CDC which might get your attention.  

I mentioned this yesterday but at the time I assumed that it would get some attention.  Now it appears to have gone down the memory hole.  The government of Afghanistan, through an official spokesman, says it has incontrovertible proof that Pakistani intelligence tried to murder Afghan President Hamid Kharzai. This is a very serious matter.

In the closet.  Yep, this web site for gay Republicans (a concept sort of like Jewish Nazis or Lakota cavalry scouts, as far as I can tell) is all excited that the Republican nominee actually deigned to talk to a homosexual.

It does not seem to bother them, however, that the meeting was not on McCain's published schedule and in fact, happened in secret.  Nor is there any word on what they discussed.

The bogus worldview of economists is embedded so deeply in our political culture that most people don't even perceive it.  Journalists, politicians, and most thoughtful, well-educated people think it's reality, not ideology.  Economics professors fill the heads of college freshmen with pure garbage and nobody tries to stop them.  Most offensive of all, to me, are the economists I keep hearing on NPR and reading in the NYT claiming that there's is the only really scientific social science, a claim based as far as I can tell on their extensive use of mathematics, whereas the precise opposite is true.  Garbage in, garbage out.  (And by the way, sociologists use math almost as much. Just sayin'.) I will take on just one of the most pernicious falsehoods of the so-called "discipline" below the fold.

No, I'm not talking about Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. These are three great mysteries that trouble the Enlightenment project -- the quest to understand the universe from the human perspective. These enduring mysteries are among the reasons so many people still cling to irrational beliefs and mysticism.  No, this isn't about politics, not directly, but Daily Kos has always made room for science, these issues have a lot of cultural relevance and help elucidate the sources of the divide between progressive humanists and religious conservatives, and anyway I already wrote it so I figured I'd cross-post it.

In ascending order of philosophical profundity (in my personal ranking) they are: (read on)

Back when I was in college -- not so long ago really -- the deep thinkers had us deep in the doo doo. Robert Heilbroner's Inquiry into the Human Prospect was required reading. Hint: He didn't think it was exactly fabulous. Some very convincing dismal futures were being painted by science fiction writers like John Brunner - The Sheep Look Up and Stand on Zanzibar made an impression on me, for sure. The Club of Rome, a group of high powered movers and shakers, foresaw catastrophic resource scarcities, the WorldWatch Institute was busy meticulously documenting the fall of civilization. There was Moment in the Sun and The Population Bomb and you name it.

John McCain started to launch into song on one memorable occasion, but he never gave us the complete lyrics. Here is my humble offering to fill the need I'm sure everyone is feeling.

What is the DSM-IV diagnosis for this?

WASHINGTON — President Bush, saying that "normalcy is returning back to Iraq," argued Thursday that last year's U.S. troop "surge" has improved Iraq's security to the point where political and economic progress are blossoming as well.

Bush coupled his description of the situation in Iraq, meant to lay the groundwork for next month's report to Congress by U.S. military and diplomatic chiefs, with a forceful slap at war critics.

"Some ... seem unwilling to acknowledge that progress is taking place," Bush said in a speech at the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio. He accused war opponents of constantly shifting their critique, adding: "No matter what shortcomings these critics diagnose, their prescription is always the same — retreat."

In touting progress in Iraq, however, the president appeared to gloss over developments that most would characterize as a far cry from "normalcy," even by Iraqi standards.

Sen. McCain says, "Al Qaeda is in Iraq. It’s called ‘Al Qaeda in Iraq.’ My friends, if we left, they wouldn’t be establishing a base. They’d be taking a country, and I’m not going to allow that to happen."  He's running largely on the strength of his claimed foreign policy expertise. He says -- and he reiterated yesterday -- that if the United States withdraws from Iraq, al Qaeda will take over the country.