{"id":11541,"date":"2023-03-26T01:05:00","date_gmt":"2023-03-26T07:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.zmetro.com\/?p=11541"},"modified":"2023-03-26T13:14:38","modified_gmt":"2023-03-26T19:14:38","slug":"3-26","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.zmetro.com\/?p=11541","title":{"rendered":"3.26"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

We shouldn\u2019t limit<\/a> the pool of potential NIH Directors to people who are most credentialed in the traditional academic life sciences. To draw on a private sector example, that would be like hiring a new CEO of a beverage company only from the existing pool of beverage company executives. Instead, when a company enters a CEO search, they might look to hire from within their own industry, but they also search far and wide for executives from other industries who have overseen change that their own firm would like to emulate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Across the barriers of language, class and faith, joined-up gardening<\/a> unites us, from Oxford to the Sufi heart of Sindh<\/p>\n\n\n\n

JPMorgan is getting no special arrangements<\/a> as part of this deal, according to one of the people familiar with the talks. “These deposits will be treated the exact same way anyone\u2019s non-insured deposit would be treated,” this person said. The deposits have to stay at First Republic for 120 days and earn interest at the same rate of current depositors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“So yes, of course, Syd loomed all over ‘The Dark Side of the Moon<\/a>.’ Maybe Syd was the big shadow that creates the dark side of the moon,” he continued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Breitbart\u2019s debate partner on that show, liberal Leslie Marshall, gleefully predicted that Trump would become another Schwarzenegger<\/a> and destroy the GOP from within.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Again, making predictions<\/a> is hard, especially about the future. Perhaps more interesting is how Schwartz and Leyden looked that what might possibly go wrong with the bullish scenario, what they call \u201cscenario spoilers\u201d that could \u201ccut short the Long Boom.\u201d As I think you will see, many of them seem pretty relevant to America and the world of the 2020s. Here they are, in the order they were presented in 1997, with some comments by me:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When I asked the Committee to Protect Journalists<\/a> why Assange did not make their list, I was directed to a December 2019 statement: \u201cAfter extensive research and consideration, CPJ chose not to list Assange as a journalist, in part because his role has just as often been as a source,\u201d it reads, \u201cand because WikiLeaks does not generally perform as a news outlet with an editorial process.\u201d The newspapers that signed the November letter have similarly refused to claim Assange as one of their own. At the same time, other charges and smears have warped the public narrative, obscuring the threats to the First Amendment. Many of the outlets now expressing alarm have ignored or misrepresented key information about his plight along the way. It is crucial to reflect on these misdirections, especially as a blatant assault on press freedom now appears to be on the brink of success.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n

https:\/\/t.co\/Y3pPOfukWl<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Bob Lefsetz (@Lefsetz) March 20, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n