An orphan drug that has already passed FDA safety tests turns out to reverse (yes, reverse!) Alzheimer's - in mice. Human trials will start soon and should produce results within the year.
Scott Turner, director of the Georgetown University Medical Center's Memory Disorders Program, who was not involved in the research, welcomed the findings.
"This looks very exciting," he said. "This is a brand new way to move forward in human trials of Alzheimer's disease and it works great with mice."
Turner, a neurologist and leading expert in Alzheimer's disease, however cautioned that more study was needed to see if the same results can be seen in humans.
"One obstacle is that the mice may not be a good model of Alzheimer's disease. We have so many things that work in mice and we try them in humans and they just completely fail," he said.
...
Trials should begin in the next month or so, Landreth said.
"Perhaps the most important thing is to ask the question: Does this drug work in human beings as it does in mice? Does it get into the brain? And does it have an effect on amyloid levels and increase ApoE levels?
"We need to do that in normal human beings and see if humans are like mice."
And the drug:
Bexarotene was initially made by US-based Ligand Pharmaceuticals under the brand name Targretin.
It gained orphan drug status in the United States -- approval by the US Food and Drug Administration -- in 1999 as a treatment for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, a rare cancer of the immune system that manifests in the skin and liver.
The Japanese pharmaceutical giant Eisai bought the worldwide rights for it in 2006. Bexarotene is now available in 26 countries in Europe, North America and South America.
The study abstract is at Science Magazine; the article is available to subscribers.
First!?
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | February 09, 2012 at 05:25 PM
Can I be juvenile and say "first"?
Posted by: rse | February 09, 2012 at 05:26 PM
Be not the first to take up the new, nor yet the last to set aside the old.
=============
Posted by: First mouse out of the box wins. | February 09, 2012 at 05:28 PM
Can I be juvenile and say "first"?
yes, but it'd be wrong.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 09, 2012 at 05:48 PM
So, what do y'all think? Should there be some type of procedure to try this on 90 somethings with Alzheimer's? I realize there are lots of issues we lawyers would bring up (can a guardian consent to this type of procedure, liability issues, would a body of certified physicians and biochemists be needed to certify an expedited procedure for experimental trials, etcetera, etcetera ad nauseam), but let's face it, if you envision yourself in your nineties and having Alzheimer's, wouldn't you think a little dice rolling is in order? Or JOMers who are experts in the area of experimental medicine going to tell me there already is such a procedure?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 09, 2012 at 05:51 PM
Make that: "Or are JOMers who are . . . ."
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 09, 2012 at 05:52 PM
I have 3 friends dealing with Alzheimers, 2 taking care of a parent with the disease and one whose 59 year old husband is in the early to mid stages of the disease. I don't think any of them would hesitate to try just about anything to bring their loved ones back. And, I'm sure the Alzheimer patient would do anything to come back, if they were aware of anything at their stage.
Alzheimer patients are the true walking dead. It is the most heart breaking illness for a family of anything I've ever witnessed. And so often, when they reach a certain deterioration level, they turn violent and can no longer be cared for at home.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 06:25 PM
I had something important to say on this subject . . . but I forgot what it was.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 09, 2012 at 06:25 PM
If Obama gets a second term, I might want to forget everything.
Posted by: Frau Vergissmeinnicht | February 09, 2012 at 06:32 PM
Sara, your post illustrates the point that perhaps the experimental treatments shouldn't depend on age. A 59 year old could have a more advanced case than a 90 something. Should age make any difference at all?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 09, 2012 at 06:41 PM
Frau
To that end, I note that Zero doubled down today behind closed doors with Democrats on the restriction on restriction of religious freedom. I have to admit to being thrilled that is the case, as he and his party are going to make a number of Democrat Senators dead men walking with this one. When Obama lover Rick Warren tweets to the world he will go to jail rather than comply, you know that this has grown to a point it is costing them votes with all but the progs who were going to vote for them anyway.
Solitaire with a deck with missing cards I still contend. LOL
Posted by: Gmax | February 09, 2012 at 06:49 PM
TC: My quick answer is that a disease is a disease and follows a certain course, whether you are 60 or 90. The big difference may be how long a younger sufferer lives in the final limbo state and requires constant care.
My Mother had stroke-related dementia in her final year. It had many similarities to Alzheimers, her age regression, her own frustration, etc., but she never forgot who she was nor lost her ability to identify her family members and close friends. Everyone I know who has dealt with an Alz. patient says the day their mother or father or spouse no long recognized them was the worst day of their lives.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 06:51 PM
President Nero has done the near impossible.
This is the one issue uniting the Evangelicals, Catholics, and even the Baptists. Who woulda thunk?
Politically, the reaction of the Church especially may help doom the Democratic Party.
Nero was I believe the emperor who "perfected" the persecution of Christians, by the way.
Posted by: matt | February 09, 2012 at 06:59 PM
let's revise that a little. He was also the Emperor who reigned at the beginning of the Jewish Uprising.
Posted by: matt | February 09, 2012 at 07:02 PM
GMax-- you know this thing is a complete debacle for 'Bam when the legacy media start bugging him about it. So 'Bam will shuck and jive and say this is a serious matter and postpone adopting the regulation until December. That will only piss off both sides and allow the Repubs -- Rightfully-- to bash Dems all Fall with "what else is in Obamacare". As you point out that kills off a few more House Dems and definitely a couple more Dem Senators. Love it Love it. Thank you Secretary Seblius.
Posted by: NK | February 09, 2012 at 07:02 PM
I've lost count of the number of drugs I've followed which virtually cure mice of cancer only to be just about useless in humans.
Medicine seems to me about one part breathtaking genetic and technological wonders and two parts bone-through-the-nose witch doctoring.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 07:04 PM
Barry's exercising imperial powers regarding No Child Left Behind. Leftist outrage imminent.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 07:09 PM
Well, per TV news all four senators facing recalls submitted enough challenges to end the process. They forgot to report any numbers, and forgot about the Tea Party's separate effort. Next the GAB will forget to accept any challenges. If this level of fraud is found in the Walker petitions, the left can forget about that recall as well. Until then, some lawyers will cash in.
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 07:10 PM
Shouldn't one of the presidential candidates - say, Romney? - explain that this isn't just a religious issue? The mandates affect everyone, and forcing insurers to cover things that customers may not need or want insurance for increases everyone's premiums.
Obviously, this is all a precursor to mandating abortion coverage. That's a women's health matter, after all.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 09, 2012 at 07:12 PM
Henry-- the GAB will review the challenges and decide how many signatures to void, correct?
Posted by: NK | February 09, 2012 at 07:19 PM
Henry,
If they fail, do you think Walker will send them a thank you note for funding his re-election campaign three years in advance?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 09, 2012 at 07:19 PM
Should age make any difference at all?
I would think it should be tried on younger patients, if there has to be a choice, since they are less likely to have other health problems, and more years to gain. And I say that as one who has a 90-year-old father who is in the earlyish stages of Alzheimer's.
But I'm not sure why anyone but the families should have to decide. We've fallen into the trap of making every medical issue a public policy choice rather than a private market decision.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 09, 2012 at 07:20 PM
How much will it cost? There's the rub.........
When will the 20-year patent expire? Does it start fresh in 2006?
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 07:23 PM
NK, what the GAB plans to do is kinda like the left's approach to the last cencus -- damn the facts and use statistical sampling instead. This will be decided in the courts, where the GAB will also face the Tea Party verifications (they checked far more stuff).
Rick, Walker won't say a thing but he will help everyone else to get a new POTUS with filibuster proof majorities like he has in WI.
I am encouraged, but want to see numbers so I can believe TV. They did this story in 30 seconds which shows they don't like what they saw. : )
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 07:26 PM
Yes, that's right Matt more from Montefiore, I suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish%E2%80%93Roman_War
Vespasian was one of the more interesting characters, that was profiled in one of those
History Channel specials on military commanders, they had the boss from MI-5, Finch portraying him.
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 07:30 PM
Shouldn't one of the presidential candidates - say, Romney? - explain that this isn't just a religious issue? The mandates affect everyone, and forcing insurers to cover things that customers may not need or want insurance for increases everyone's premiums.
Romney spent most of his time with Cavuto today on this subject, he has hit it several times now in speeches, and he was the first to come out with his Op-Ed last week.
I think, however, he has been mostly arguing that the HHS mandate is a liberty, 1st Amendment issue, rather than a broader theme as you describe. I agree with others who have said they don't like paying for something they don't need. Birth control, pregnancy, post-partum problems, substance abuse are some of the things I resent paying for now.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 07:37 PM
Everyone I know who has dealt with a loved one's Alzheimer's would leap at the chance for any experiment with a shred of a chance of success. In a heartbeat.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 07:41 PM
I agree, Ext, but I think that muddies the waters. You won't unite moderate and even left-leaning Catholics on stuff like that - they're big government lovers in many ways and fought for Obamacare. When you have these guys agreeing with you, and spitting mad about it, it is a rare event and you have to maximize that leverage.
In order to get the most traction between now and the election, it has to be hammered as a First Amendment issue.
I also personally believe that's the central issue. Dismantle religious liberty and everything else, and I mean everything else, will follow.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 09, 2012 at 07:42 PM
Henry, I understand you to be saying that if the challenges are all upheld the number of valid signatures will be insufficient to trigger the election--right?
Does any individual or group have any kind of handle on what share of the signatures sre clearly invalid, uncertain, or arguable?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 07:45 PM
Understandable reaction, Danube, the concern is whether it will really work,
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 07:49 PM
Maybe you're right, Porch, but people should be thinking "Will they come for me next?" Somebody should be saying "Yes, they will. They already are, and you don't even know it."
Posted by: Extraneus | February 09, 2012 at 07:54 PM
Danube, correct for the 4 senators. We'll know on Walker the 27th. I expect to see press releases with actual numbers from the campaigns, not online in the usual places yet. "Verify the Vote" (?), the Tea Party verification Caro is helping with will have their own challenges and totals, this info plus the raw searchable database they built will also be put online. The senators needed to challenge about 30% of the signatures, Walker will need to challenge 40%. The big union effort was for Walker, so I expect higher levels of fraud in those petitions. If I can't find links tonight, I pretty sure they will be easy to find tomorrow.
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 07:56 PM
Somebody should be saying "Yes, they will. They already are, and you don't even know it."
Yes, they will, Ext. I just think that particular argument is communicated much more intensely across the spectrum when "coming for" means "coming for your religious beliefs" and not "coming for your right not to be forced to purchase X."
Not that I think my right not to be forced to purchase X isn't important. But fundamentally this goes much deeper than my right not to purchase podiatry coverage if I don't want it.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 09, 2012 at 08:01 PM
As a strategic matter for this election, Porchlight, I agree with you, and I think the GOP candidates are taking the correct approach if they are focusing on religious freedom issue. However, if the therapeutic administrative state continues to advance, all alternative ways of looking at the world, including religious conscience, will be wiped out. Thus, I am glad that free market oriented economists are focusing on the issue of why are the feds mandating this and that types of specific coverages in the first place.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 09, 2012 at 08:01 PM
As a strategic matter for this election, Porchlight, I agree with you, and I think the GOP candidates are taking the correct approach if they are focusing on religious freedom issue. However, if the therapeutic administrative state continues to advance, all alternative ways of looking at the world, including religious conscience, will be wiped out. Thus, I am glad that free market oriented economists are focusing on the issue of why are the feds mandating this and that types of specific coverages in the first place.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 09, 2012 at 08:01 PM
Sara,
You do know that RomneyCare has the same provision on contreception as the HHS regulation, don't you? Its his Achilles heel. That is why Sibelius and the Regime decided to force it now. No win for Mitt.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 09, 2012 at 08:01 PM
Mouse Up? Mouse Down...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87FiQiyjWhY
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 09, 2012 at 08:09 PM
You do know that RomneyCare has the same provision on contreception as the HHS regulation, don't you? Its his Achilles heel. That is why Sibelius and the Regime decided to force it now. No win for Mitt.
Well they'll have egg on their face as this was something that Romney vetoed, more than once, and his veto was overridden by the majority in the legislature.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 08:13 PM
Even with this surrent outrage, he is now at 49/47 at RCP.
When Sebelius says contraception will be "free," there is a huge wad of people out there who believe that's true. And who's against making something free?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:13 PM
Can I be free?
Posted by: MarkO | February 09, 2012 at 08:20 PM
Well RCP averages the good with the totally implausible polls, so what is the use in that.
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 08:20 PM
Wow! TMJ4 tv has more details on their website (I have their app--no linky). Each senate recall needed a little over 15,000 signatures. The number collected ranged from 16,000 (Galloway) to 21000 (Wanggaard). The data presentation in the article is a mess, but the least iffy challenge totals are:
Fitzgerald - 5045
Wanggaard - 7491
Galloway - 3817
Mouton - 6112
These average over 30% of signatures turned in.
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 08:21 PM
Here is the Cavuto/Romney segment video
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 08:21 PM
*current*
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:22 PM
Here you go Henry;
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139050214.html
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 08:23 PM
Well they'll have egg on their face as this was something that Romney vetoed, more than once, and his veto was overridden by the majority in the legislature.
So was Mitt the driving force behind Romneycare, or were the Dems already determined to do something and Romney tried to make it as benign as possible? Because if it's the former, then I think he gets the blame for the whole thing. Once you throw that rock at the mountain, you're responsible for the whole avalanche, regardless of your intent.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 09, 2012 at 08:25 PM
an the man be any more despicable a weasel?
Norah O'Donnell tweeted:
"In the Oval Office, President Obama refuses to answer if he stands by contraception rule. Says to reporter: "Come on guys.""
Posted by: matt | February 09, 2012 at 08:26 PM
"Well RCP averages the good with the totally implausible polls, so what is the use in that."
The trend. And Raz is at 50% overall approval. People like free shit, and they don't mind being ordered around. Until it's too late.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:26 PM
narc;
That was actually remembered from Josephus, who I read many years ago. Either that or Church history.
Posted by: matt | February 09, 2012 at 08:28 PM
Jimmyk: Watch the Cavuto clip. He says there that this birth control, abortion funding, etc. was all passed before he became Governor, but I don't know enough about the whole history.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 08:29 PM
"Can I be free?"
Free as a bird, provided only that you agree to be handcuffed to Dick Vitale for the remainder of your natural life. Free healthcare. Free gasoline. Free booze. You and Dick.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:29 PM
Everyone I know who has dealt with a loved one's Alzheimer's would leap at the chance for any experiment with a shred of a chance of success. In a heartbeat.
Of course, but if each dose costs, say, $1000, and they have no idea if it will really work, then it may not be so easy a decision.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 09, 2012 at 08:30 PM
So it looks like they are doubling down, on Sharia compliant journalism
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1742/190/CNN_Fires_Entire_Jewish_Staff_Of_Israel_Bureau_-_And_Retains_Only_Arab_Reporters.html
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 08:34 PM
Thanks Narciso. The guy in the video that looks like he just got hit with a 2 x 4 is the GAB press dude.
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 08:36 PM
I've lost count of the number of drugs I've followed which virtually cure mice of cancer only to be just about useless in humans.
I wonder if there's good reason to believe the reverse can't happen. Could there be drugs which aren't investigated further because they are just about useless in mice, which could virtually cure humans of cancer?
Posted by: bgates | February 09, 2012 at 08:41 PM
--The trend. And Raz is at 50% overall approval. People like free shit, and they don't mind being ordered around. Until it's too late.--
Looks to me like it's getting close to cute, bare, bum time again. :)
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 08:41 PM
Via Instapundit:
In the Oval Office, President Obama refuses to answer if he stands by contraception rule. Says to reporter: "Come on guys."
He asnwered like 8 questions already...
Posted by: Ranger | February 09, 2012 at 08:43 PM
Daniel Henninger, via Hot Air:
"Older Americans have sought for years to drop out of Medicare and contract for their own health insurance. They cannot without forfeiting their Social Security payments. They effectively are locked in. Nor can the poor escape Medicaid, even as the care it gives them degrades. Farmers, ranchers and loggers struggled for years to protect their livelihoods beneath uncompromising interpretations of federal environmental laws. They, too, had to comply. University athletic programs were ground up by the U.S. Education Department’s rote, forced gender balancing of every sport offered.
"With the transformers, it never stops. In September, the Obama Labor Department proposed rules to govern what work children can do on farms. After an outcry from rural communities over the realities of farm traditions, the department is now reconsidering a 'parental exemption.' Good luck to the farmers.
"The Catholic Church has stumbled into the central battle of the 2012 presidential campaign: What are the limits to Barack Obama’s transformative presidency? The Catholic left has just learned one answer: When Mr. Obama says, 'Everyone plays by the same set of rules,' it means they conform to his rules. What else could it mean?"
As Eli Wallach's bandito said in The Magnificent Seven, if God did not want them shorn he would not have made them sheep.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:44 PM
Yes, seriously what do you expect, OT, this is a bit disqueting;
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fox-business-network-adds-encore-presentations-of-marquee-business-programming-2012-02-09
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 08:45 PM
Good grief. That really is nothin' left to lose. No one could call being handcuffed to Dick "natural life."
Dickie really pumped up the resume of those White Phantoms last night. Ooops.
I think it's too late. Too much free stuff. The HHS will tell us everything. JFC.
Posted by: MarkO | February 09, 2012 at 08:46 PM
--I wonder if there's good reason to believe the reverse can't happen. Could there be drugs which aren't investigated further because they are just about useless in mice, which could virtually cure humans of cancer?--
Not unlikely at all.
The first test is usually just petri dish efficacy on bare cells. If that works then they try mice and if they fail there that's usually pretty much the end of it.
A lot of it is serendipitous. They noticed diabetics who use the drug metformin and contract breast cancer to control diabetes did much better in chemo than those who were diabetic but not on it. Now it's all the rage in human clinical trials specifically for breast cancer even though its been around for decades.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 08:48 PM
Maybe this is better than calling out doom:
David Burge @iowahawkblog
We Are Completely F***ed, Exhibit 757104-604-C http://youtu.be/FizspmIJbAw
Posted by: MarkO | February 09, 2012 at 08:49 PM
Says to reporter: "Come on guys."
Translation: Hey, you know the rules--no tough questions. How do you think I, a completely unaccomplished semi-literate community organizer, got elected to be the leader of the free world? We've got to keep this going another nine months so I can keep the evil Republicans from overturning all my accomplishments. Don't blow it now!
Posted by: jimmyk | February 09, 2012 at 08:50 PM
Well she fits in much better over there, with the Cookie Monster and the Count.
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 08:55 PM
Point taken re payments, jimmyk: never, ever would I propose that the patient get the treatment at someone else's expense, unless he had bought insurance that would cover it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 08:56 PM
And, Miss Piggy is the Sec. of State.
Whoa. I'm brimming with snark. Or, am I swiiming with sharks? I forget and that puts me back on topic.
Everytime ESPN replays Rivers' shot I grin. Does that make me a bad person? Hell no.
Posted by: MarkO | February 09, 2012 at 08:59 PM
WARNING. Don't type angry.
Posted by: MarkO | February 09, 2012 at 09:00 PM
Here is the truethevote report for Fitzgerald. Their methodology looks sound. If the source data is supportive, get ready for some very unhappy recallers.
Posted by: scott | February 09, 2012 at 09:00 PM
jimmyk @8:50, exactly right. It couldn't be any more obvious.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 09, 2012 at 09:04 PM
Well there will certainly be some 'Scanners' level explosions, like with Kloppy's failed
recalled effort, henry,
those who think this contraception mandate is some 'cunning, cunning' plan, is to deny who
Obama is; he hates 'bitter clingers' believers in negative liberties like freedom
of belief.
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 09:10 PM
Thanks Scott!
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 09:12 PM
No problem, Henry. Thanks for the updates.
Posted by: scott | February 09, 2012 at 09:29 PM
Man bites dog- Dane County Judge denies injunction in NAACP voter ID suit. It will go to trial later though.
Posted by: henry | February 09, 2012 at 09:32 PM
Santorum says ‘other types of emotions’ could preclude women in combat
Hmmmmmm.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 09:36 PM
http://democurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2012/02/vigilante-group-verify-recall-makes.html
"Have we really given our recall verification duties to We the People of the Republic and the Wisconsin Grandsons of Liberty?
Has anyone answered the question; why are outside conservative vigilante groups like Verify the Recall, backed by tea party fringe group We the People of the Republic, allowed to trash our recall process with their biased analysis of signatures? Public records, sure, but they should have no input in the process. If they have a problem, sit in a corner. Anyone think the governor's own verification team won't be partisan enough?
Check out Ross Brown, who heads up We the People of the Republic. WKOW:
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 09:41 PM
If there was any doubt that they are on the other side, although Leaverett, Freeman,
Lang, McGovern have suggested it;
http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/09/10354553-israel-teams-with-terror-group-to-kill-irans-nuclear-scientists-us-officials-tell-nbc-news?chromedomain=openchannel
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 09:44 PM
Gosh I thought the left loved participatory and direct democracy.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 09:45 PM
I remember Windrem, in particular, because he was the conduit used to suggest in the Spring of 2000, that Elian's family were armed and dangerous, hence the rules of rendition,
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 09:50 PM
Boy, the poor Luciferian guy seems to have re-earned his computer privileges on a previous thread.
Can't help but feel bad for the guy.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 09, 2012 at 09:50 PM
I was going to say, Iggy, cleanup aisle 5.
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 09:53 PM
"Gosh I thought the left loved participatory and direct democracy."
Gee whiz. I guess it sticks in the teacher's craw when his students become the teacher.
And youse guys are the best teachers.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 09:57 PM
And some of the Duke and Duke crowd as well;
http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/02/09/muslim-brotherhood-doubletalk-fools-the-west-scares-arab-liberals/
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Gee whiz. I guess it sticks in the teacher's craw when his students become the teacher.
Actually, it sounds like that's what has gotten you so unhappy over the last few months Ben-Dana. You can't stand that grass roots organizations like the TEA Party are successfully organizing the way the left did in the 60s. Now it is the TEA Party that can mobilize large numbers of volunteers, and all the left has these days are rent a thugs, overpaid state employees, and grad students.
Posted by: Ranger | February 09, 2012 at 10:06 PM
If it weren't for us, the people, Rather's fraudulent hit piece on Bush and the TANG would be the record of history. Instead, Rather is history.
Open-source expertise and fact-checking are a mortal threat to these unprincipled scumbags. Witness what is happening to the dinosaurs at ABC News.
Still waiting, Mr. Ward: on the basis of what principle are you or the state (or anyone else) entitled to know the scope of the Vatican's wealth? Come on, dear boy, you can do it: clench your teeth, ball your fists, close your eyes tight, screw up your courage and answer the question.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 10:14 PM
Can't help but feel bad for the guy.
Just be glad he up-chucked that text gack on a dead thread.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 09, 2012 at 10:15 PM
Santorum says ‘other types of emotions’ could preclude women in combat
Hmmmmmm.
Posted by: Sara | February 09, 2012 at 09:36 PM
-------------
Wow, I was just remarking the other day that the most important issue is getting women into combat.
I'm glad Sara is on my side. Obama too. And, Romney; he's for it.
Damn that Neanderthal Santorum.
Posted by: mockmook | February 09, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Ranger,
It's not just that. The Chicom mercantilist slavers are down for the count, EUtopia is BK, the Skydragon has ice breath, Arab Spring stinks of headchoppers, the occupoopers are smelly jokes and it ain't halftime - BOzo's down by 47 with 10 minutes on the clock and he doesn't have the ball.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 09, 2012 at 10:21 PM
Yeah if we get some Code Stink types on the front lines, what could go wrong?
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 09, 2012 at 10:23 PM
"BOzo's down by 47 with 10 minutes on the clock and he doesn't have the ball."
Don't remind me. Brady was up by two with four minutes left and the ball, and couldn't close the deal.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 10:26 PM
"A study in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry has concluded that distrust of the government is a treatable mental disorder. Known as “AGP” or “anti-government phobia,” the study claims: “…that unfounded fear of government is a recognizable mental illness, closely related to paranoid schizophrenia. Anti-Government Phobia (AGP) differs from most mental illnesses, however, in that it is highly infectious and has an acute onset. Symptoms include extreme suspiciousness, conspiracy-mongering, delusional thought patterns, staunch ‘us against them’ mentality, withdrawal from reality, and often religious fanaticism…”
http://www.breitbart.tv/study-distrust-of-government-a-mental-disorder/
Is this what all that Obama pill talk was about?
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 09, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Late to the date. Just back from City Tavern and a most delightful meal with our host Clarice (thanks much!), Kim (great to meet you) & Jane (glad you are off the couch) from the Sturbridge Tea Party , Janet (great DTOM pin, I wear it with pride !) and younger daughter, Windy Daze. Nice. Very Nice Evening.
~
Re Alzheimer's, I have not read through the thread, not sure if already mentioned, but this report from Canada describes absolutely amazing results and displays actual before and after testing of a male human (husband of the doctor who conducted the study) and reports from other tests around the world.
ABO~OMG,
Sandy
Posted by: Sandy Daze | February 09, 2012 at 10:36 PM
That's old news, TK. The CCCP was treating those poor souls in insane asylums 75 years ago.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 09, 2012 at 10:40 PM
"Still waiting, Mr. Ward: on the basis of what principle are you or the state (or anyone else) entitled to know the scope of the Vatican's wealth?"
Papists are the most defensive about the History of the catholic church. If you understood the demented beginnings of that mockery of Christian principle, you would be the first to ask. As it is; you are 'verklempt' without any basis in Holy Scripture ,as are the rest of your
schismatic dogmatists. Lacking the fundamental curiosity of your inane question makes you as culpable as your spiritually dead religion.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 10:42 PM
Wow, nice meet up Sandy; I'm envious.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 09, 2012 at 10:43 PM
"You can't stand that grass roots organizations like the TEA Party are successfully organizing "
Best oxymoron of the Day/
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 10:44 PM
"Damn that Neanderthal Santorum."
Give him his due. Cro-Magnon......
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | February 09, 2012 at 10:54 PM
So, Ben-Dana, you don't think the TEA Party is a spontanious, self organizing phenomenon?
Posted by: Ranger | February 09, 2012 at 10:56 PM
Evidently she has more fans than just Roger Goodell: http://www.haaretz.com/culture/arts-leisure/israeli-fans-beg-pm-to-hold-off-iran-attack-over-madonna-show-1.412014
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 09, 2012 at 10:56 PM
It was a lot of fun seeing everyone though I had to bob and weave to make sure Janet didn't sign me up for any of her good deeds.
Jane said she heard today that Kerry opposes the Administration's no exemptions HHS contraceptive, abortifacient regs.
Anyone see that report?
Posted by: Clarice | February 09, 2012 at 10:57 PM
One of these days, they will learn not to fall for this, ofcourse Brad Friedman is one of those nutrooter election denialists, and ACORN booster
http://www.mediaite.com/online/james-okeefes-fake-tim-tebow-voter-fraud-investigation-doesnt-have-a-prayer/
Posted by: narciso | February 09, 2012 at 10:57 PM