"America is a Christian culture" wrote Keillor. And he's right. It is. Stating a fact is never hate speech.

It's a Christian culture made vibrant, in part, by its non-co-religionists, and I'm sure Mr Keillor would agree. But a Christian culture nonetheless.

"People who feel excluded" wrote Keillor. Not "people who should be excluded" or "people who I'd like to exclude". Then, setting the bar of "Christmas" at sugary treats and songs made meaningless by their inclusion in supermaket muzak, Keillor sets about including everyone. If you're excluded from Christmas, you exclude yourself, he says. Again, truth, not vitriol.

The same persons of Jewish faith who claim, in these letter pages, to be outraged by Keillor's inclusiveness, could never, then, travel to Fiji. Or India. Or Laos. Or anywhere that wears the beliefs of the majority on its sleeve. By the same logic you would have to ban public celebration of Jewish holidays in Israel, lest they offend the multitude of Muslims, and Christians, who live there.

As an atheist living and working in China, I am amused every year at the Christmas lights that are put up here. I could wax sarcastic about a nation of Communist atheists celebrating the birth of Christ, or, as Keillor suggests, I could simply get over myself, and take from Xmas what it has to offer.

And it has to offer, frankly, a lot. Peace on earth. And good will to all. For starters.

-- the problem is people building houses too close to them.

That's what destroyed homes in Canberra -- in fact that's what destroys homes pretty much every summer in Australia -- and that's also what happened in California.

Poor planning is, sadly, everywhere.

That said, the eucalypt does have some pretty questionable "green" credentials for a plant.

You'd think any growing thing would automatically pass green muster, but with its root system poisoning the soil, and its agressive propagation, the mighty gum tree rather resembles, well, us.

Using 'em for biofuel? If the chemisty makes sense, sure! They grow fast, and as one of the sources you cited suggests, they grow in soil which is otherwise very poor.

Nice article, Andrew!

>>A "Funkyzeit mit Bruno" movie, however, I'd stand in line for.

OH, ich auch! Ich auch for sure!

Here's Bruno talking with Pastor Quinn the "gay converter" -- possibly his finest moment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jliqpVUkTco

I started reading this article dreading that the movie I'd enjoyed so much had come at some hideous cost, or was staged.

Everything in this article -- including the whiny television staffer who supposedly "lost her job" for not doing her job (duh!) -- simply bears out what a humane and brilliant comic genius Baron Cohen is, and what an enourmous amount of thought and effort went into the movie.

Not only is the film wickedly funny, but after reading the article it also appears no animals -- or people -- were unduly harmed making it.

I think I'll have to see it again!

Is a $20 wine twice as good as a $10 generic?

Sure.

What about a $50 bottle -- twice as good as something in the $20 range?

Probably -- but not always.

At $100, will I taste twice the goodness of a $50 bottle?

Probably not. It will be "better" -- but not twice as good.

$200, twice as good as $100?

Certainly not. More like better nuances on the same theme.

More than $200?

Well, now you're in the territory of paying a whole lot more for very, very little extra.

Every engineer of every stripe, every scientist, surely every intelligent person on the planet knows this Law.

How is it that every wine article ever written uses three or more adjective-strewn pages explaining what can be summed up in a sentence?

>>Is the voice of mainstream, moderate Islam, or isn't it?

So wrote Goldenboy.

So, in the same spirit, I've a question for Goldenboy:

Have you stopped beating your wife?

You see, no matter how you answer that question, you're a wife-beater! Clever, eh? (Not!)

To move away from word-play, I will actually answer your question.

No, it isn't the voice of mainstream, moderate Islam, just as George Bush isn't the voice of mainstream, moderate America.

But wait a minute, your sophistry goes, isn't he the _leader_ of Islam in Australia? But wait a minute, I can only respond, isn't George Bush the _leader_ of America?

When leaders, in general, start to be the "voice" of their people, then your false dichotomy will make sense.

But that clearly isn't the case generally, and it's certainly not the case here.

There are Moslems in Australia who believe this nut, just as their are Jews in Australia who believe that women are "unclean" after their period and must be "purified", and just as their are Christians in Australia who believe that women shouldn't speak in church -- and, no doubt, athiests in Australia who believe that all "believers" should be diagnosed with a disease of the mind.

But to assign these whacko voices the role of "voice of their people" -- ignoring whatever political manouvering has led them to be temporarily in leadership positions, is just, well, whacko.

But you go ahead and enjoy word-play as a substitute for debate -- I'm sure you'll win more that way.

Mark Harrison's Taiwan/China Theory/Future blog is, predictably, blocked in China.