Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Tab dump

1) Paul Ryan's taste in books is disappointing.

2) How does the Nordic economic model fare in times of crisis?

3) It's hard to get doctors to follow new evidence.

4) The trans-partisan tendency in American politics.

5) Conservatives are having trouble capturing the old magic on national security.

Recipe of the day: Penne with spinach and ricotta.

By Ezra Klein  |  February 11, 2010; 6:24 PM ET
Categories:  Tab Dump  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Filibuster reform needs 67 votes, Reid says
Next: Got to admit it's getting better...


Regarding Paul Ryan's penchant for Ayn Rand:

You know, I really liked what the Harry Potter books had to say, but that doesn't make them a good guide for public policy.

Posted by: billkarwin | February 11, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Ezra, I find the following quote from the Courage article completely confusing and would be interested in your view on it:

"Under federal law, Courage's findings about efficacy can't alter the amount Medicare pays doctors for stenting. The government insurance program is legally barred from considering a treatment's benefits when deciding how much to pay doctors for doing a certain procedure. Private insurance carriers, in turn, generally base their rate schedule on Medicare's."

What kind of stupid rule is this? Where does it come from?

Posted by: jdworkin1 | February 11, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who reads Goldberg for anything other than belly laughs is, I hate to say it, retarded.

Posted by: AZProgressive | February 11, 2010 8:13 PM | Report abuse

So, do you think Bill Clinton read that article before he went to the hospital to have a stent?

Posted by: KathyF | February 12, 2010 5:38 AM | Report abuse

@Chiat: "They're written by people who don't understand liberalism and the left at all, and are thus unable to present liberal ideas in terms remotely recognizable to liberals themselves."

Fair enough. Then he says: "Ryan clearly has a passion for ideas and isn't just interested in short-term positioning. It would be nice if the party had people like that who didn't also happen to be loons."

Huh. Said like someone who doesn't understand conservatism at all, and is incapable of presenting conservative ideas in terms remotely recognizable to conservatives themselves.


Posted by: Kevin_Willis | February 12, 2010 8:09 AM | Report abuse


I think the Harry Pottery books would form an excellent basis for public policy. First, everyone should have to attend a fabulous school of witchcraft and wizardry. Second, any exceptional, bespectacled shaggy-haired students must defeat Lord Voldemort. 3rd, we must all make friends with a lanky, shoot-from-the-hip redheads and hyper-intelligent, precocious young ladies who do magic better than anybody.

Finally, we should all take the obscure, impenetrable advice of Albus Dumbledore.

And, frankly, I think we should refuse to use stimulus money to shore up Gringotts Wizarding Bank. They have a giant dragon, what do they need tax payer money for?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | February 12, 2010 8:27 AM | Report abuse

So when do Republicans rewrite the Bible with John Galt in place of Jesus? And why isn't there more discussion about how a narcissistic sociopath meant to appeal to the proclivities of smug teenagers is now considered the ideal human being by one of the country's two political parties?

Posted by: eleander | February 12, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Lots of Republicans and conservatives find Rand a little to libertarian for their tastes, so I don't think that's every going to happen. And most Randians despise the Republicans and conservatism as being "part of the machine", the Illuminati, the New World Order crowd and so on.

"And why isn't there more discussion about how a narcissistic sociopath meant to appeal to the proclivities of smug teenagers is now considered the ideal human being by one of the country's two political parties?"

You're talking about Miley Cyrus, right?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | February 12, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Ezra deliberately misreads the study yet again. The COURAGE trial did not show an advantage for stents after 36 months. However there was an advantage (i.e. immediate relief of symptoms) prior to that. The advantage was greater the more severe the angina was.

In Europe the PET trial couldn't even enroll enough patients because of the immediate vs. delayed pain relief in the two trial arms.

Posted by: J_Bean | February 13, 2010 12:16 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company