A prom is just a dance, on Carl Platou, North Dakotans want property taxes, preventing Alzheimer's, and getting things done in Granite Falls.
There's more sleepwalking going on than previously thought. So says a study from Stanford University released this week.
About 8.4 million Americans are prone to "wandering around in the night." Fortunately, not all at the same time.
This is said to be the first sleepwalking studying using a large sample size --19,136 adults in 15 states were surveyed.
The study also showed that people with depression were 3.5 times more likely to sleepwalk than those without, and people with alcohol abuse/dependence or obsessive-compulsive disorder were also significantly more likely to have sleepwalking episodes. In addition, individuals taking SSRI antidepressants were three times more likely to sleepwalk twice a month or more than those who didn't.
"There is no doubt an association between nocturnal wanderings and certain conditions, but we don't know the direction of the causality," said Ohayon. "Are the medical conditions provoking sleepwalking, or is it vice versa? Or perhaps it's the treatment that is responsible."
This video from a few months ago, however, raises another interesting question: When we sleepwalk, are we different people. This guy became an artist when he walked in his sleep. He didn't much care for at when he was awake.
According to KARE 11:
Dr. Mark Mahowald, former director of the Minnesota Regional Sleep Disorders Center at Hennepin County Medical Center (HCMC), a professor at the University of Minnesota and also a visiting professor at Stanford, was a co-author of the study entitled "Prevalence and comorbidity of nocturnal wandering in the U.S. adult general population."
"The overall message is that sleepwalking is part of the human condition. It is not related necessarily to psychiatric or psychological problems. And it also gives us a window on how the brain works because most people don't have the idea that our brains can be partly awake and partly asleep at the same time and actually that's where things get interesting ," said Dr. Mahowald.
The news today that an anonymous donor has dropped $7 million on former Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman's conservative political action committee is a good time to reflect on what a difference time and fine print can make.
George Steinbrenner, the late New York Yankees owner, was convicted of a felony -- conspiracy -- after he "improperly" explained a $25,000 campaign contribution to the campaign of then-president Richard Nixon. He also encouraged employees of his shipbuilding company to make donations for which he would reimburse them. That was illegal then, and it's illegal now.
For that, Steinbrenner lost his right to vote and was thrown out of baseball for awhile.
But that was then and the $7 million anonymous donation is now.
USA Today reports:
That single donation accounts for 25% of the nearly $27.5 million raised by the group between July 1, 2010, and June 30, 2011. The organization, which touts its grass-roots advocacy efforts, showed contributions from just 34 donors during that period. Eight contributors accounted for nearly 90% of the group's revenue.
As a tax-exempt group, the American Action Network does not have to publicly disclose its donors, and spokesman Dan Conston said the organization would not comment on its contributors. It was founded with help from veteran Republican power broker Fred Malek and is run by former Minnesota senator Norm Coleman.
The filings, made available to USA TODAY, show the network spent more than $25 million and used the lion's share of the money -- $17 million -- on so-called issue advocacy and grass-roots organizing. It said $5.5 million went to activity focused on candidates and other political activity. The group also distributed money to six other conservative groups, including nearly $500,000 to American Crossroads, a super PAC linked to Republican strategist Karl Rove.
It's all perfectly legal.(2 Comments)
Oil prices have hit the lowest level in the last six months, the Associated Press is reporting today.
Just one question: What's taking you so long to get in step, gasoline prices?
The price of gasoline is not directly and immediately tied to the price of crude -- there are plenty of variables in what makes up the cost of a gallon of gasoline -- but it's relatively unusual to have a steep drop in oil in the last few weeks and have gasoline prices still trending in a fairly narrow range.
|Twin Cities Historical Gas Price Charts Provided by GasBuddy.com|
So much for the $5 gasoline panic, writes Phil Flynn on Inside Futures:
Flynn takes the gamblers' reversal of fortune as, "more proof that whenever somebody blames the speculators for the prices [of energy], they really don't know what they're talking about." Assuming the speculators aren't about to get credit for any decline in crude prices, Flynn says the fundamentals are to blame for the recent sharp decline. Newly Socialist France and the lunacy in Greece are creating uncertainty that weakens demand. In combination with the glut of oil, stockpiled when a military stand-off with Iran seemed inevitable, the price of crude and other forms of energy are dropping due to the laws of economics. Unless Europe is "solved," which is unlikely if not impossible, or a hot war breaks out in the Middle East, Flynn says "sell the rallies" is the dominant strategy. To him the only real question is whether or not a trader should go so far as to short crude or natural gas. With the fast drop below $100 a barrel in WTI crude, Flynn says its new price range is likely to be somewhere between $90 and $95 a barrel, causing him to "be a little careful" going short. For every buyer there's a seller, meaning someone is most likely making money off the drop in energy prices. Whether it's a new breed of speculators driving it lower or the obviously bearish fundamentals is beside the point for a trade. Until further notice, the best way to play crude has gone from "buy the dips" to "sell the rips."
As recently as last Friday I told Tracy Burns and Ashley Webster on the Fox Business Network that oil had not bottomed and was probably on its way to 90. We are already close!(3 Comments)
The blog, Geo-Located Minneapolis, says Google Earth has released new imagery from above and it clearly shows the path of last year's tornado through north Minneapolis.
Find plenty more images at the blog.
A check of Google Earth shows the same -- though slightly fainter -- scar across Joplin, Missouri, where a tornado struck on the same day.
If you have Google Earth, zoom in on Joplin for the full effect.
From the exotic land of neighboring Wisconsin comes a Marquette University poll today showing Republican Gov. Scott Walker sitting in a pretty good position for his recall election in three weeks.
The poll shows Walker with a 6-percentage-point lead over Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.
That's interesting enough, but this nugget is, too: Republicans are more interesting in voting than Democrats and Independents are:
Republicans are more likely to say they are "absolutely certain" to vote on June 5, at 91 percent, than are Democrats and independents, both at 83 percent. In other areas of participation, Republicans also have an advantage. Sixty-two percent of Republicans say that they have tried to persuade someone to vote for or against a candidate, compared to 54 percent among Democrats and 48 percent among independents. Democrats, however, are more likely to have been contacted by a campaign, 83 percent, to 78 percent for Republicans and 76 percent among independents. These rates are for all registered voters in the sample, not just likely voters.
Marquette Law School Poll Director Charles Franklin noted, "While both parties show unusual levels of involvement in the campaign, Republicans appear to hold an advantage in likely turnout, although Democrats are more likely to have been contacted by a campaign. In a close election with so few undecided voters, enthusiasm, turnout and campaign contact with voters may make the difference."
What's going on here?
Maybe Democrats in Wisconsin are paying attention to Democrat Jonathan Zimmerman, who wrote in the L.A. Times last week...
As a liberal, I'm troubled by the prospect of voters unseating an elected official over taxes. Or abortion. Or gun control. If you can recall leaders for any political reason, sooner or later your own ox will be gored.
I'm also worried that the Wisconsin recall, which has drawn nationwide attention and money, will trigger a vicious cycle of partisan retribution. Your guy didn't win in November? No problem. Start a recall drive now.
Most of all, though, I fear that the recall threat will make our elected officials even more timid and poll-tested than they already are. Sometimes, great leaders need to take unpopular positions.(6 Comments)