I do not declare that we will never change our drug policies, but it will be, at best, an uphill battle, and I don't see any reason to think we'll see decriminalization happening here soon, if ever. As others have pointed out, there are too many people with a vested interest in keeping our present barbaric policies in place...not just the professionals who work in and direct the prison industrial complex, but law enforcement agencies and politicians who see the maintenance of harsh drug laws as a win/win for them: they can show how "tough" and "realistic" they are in dealing with "criminals," and these laws provide the government with a rationale to continue draconian policies that make America into a virtual police state. We've gotten to the point where even questioning police officers can lead to one being multiply tasered and arrested. In addition, many are true believers in our failed drug policies, such as my brother, who is an agent for the DEA: he really believes it is necessary to interdict drug use by whatever means necessary and he won't even consider listening to talk of alternative approaches, (even though another family member has long been a pot smoker and was even once arrested for possession).

You have Obama himself, who is an admitted former user of marijuana and other substances, and who promised to halt the raids on and prosecution of legal medical marijuana dealers in states that allow them, recently indicating that these raids and prosecutions would continue under his admininistration. (Damn, I'm glad I voted for Ralph Nader and not this glad-handing smooth-talking betrayer of his own previous stated positions on one issue after another! He's Bill Clinton redux!)

As we see in our current false debate in the media about our torture practices--effective or not?--and our refusal as a nation to recognize that we committed a war crime simply by invading Iraq, we have become so corrupt and decadent a society that we seem incapable of having any serious, rational national discourse on many of our current counter-productive and even destructive polices, not just in the area of drug policy.

Assuming the idea of capturing carbon from coal plants, converting it to liquid, and discharging it underground is actually a feasible solution to the emission problems that derive from use of coal for energy, and assuming the liquid discharge underground does not or will not present its own environmental hazards, I'm curious about one thing: they mentioned the cost "to taxpayers" for the one plant they showed that employed this trapping technology as having been one billion dollars at the time the plant was built. WHY WOULD THE TAXPAYERS PAY FOR THIS TECHNOLOGY? The coal industry, like the oil industry, is composed of PRIVATE producers who reap massive profits. Why shouldn't THEY be REQUIRED to implement and pay for this technology in order to be permitted to continue doing business at all?

In terms of the harm they've actually already done, not just to America, but to the world at large, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are a greater axis of evil than N. Korea or Iran. No one would argue either of these two countries have governments we would choose to live under, but as far as their threat to the world goes, you have no proof that Iran, even if it developed a nuclear weapon, has any intentions of using it aggressively against Israel, (itself engaged in reprehensible apartheid against the original recent inhabitants of its land,the Palestinians), or that N. Korea has any intention of delivering nukes to America. This is merely the fear-mongering propaganda of those who have a vested interest in manipulating American policy. But Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have advanced the American police state at home, (I don't claim they initiated it, but they aggressively advanced it), have committed mass murder and war crimes by invading Iraq under knowlingly false pretenses, have engaged in mass evesropping of our electronic communications, outside any legal parameters, and have made us a nation of torturers, and have debased our culture to the extent where the debate now is NOT "how long should these swine rot in prison for their crimes?" but mealy-mouthed mewlings about "is it torture?" and "does it work?"

Al Qaeda had very little real capactity to harm America, but they were shrewd enough to know we could destroy ourelves from within if we fell prey to fear and panic and the drive to authoritarianism such emotions invite. And we are in the process right now of destroying ourselves internally, with nary a whisper of aggression from either Iran or N. Korea to help us along this terminal path.

"Likewise the novel of "I am Legend" ended on a drag note (or not, depending on your level of misanthropy)."

I disagree, and it doesn't require any misanthropy to do so. I think Matheson's take, though presented as a horror story, is really quite dispassionate, and the witty irony of the novel's ending allows us to realize, in a way we never would otherwise, what the monster must feel like, or that we, actually, have become or may be that monster...in addition to being a recognition that we have no claim of ownership to this rock we inhabit. The sun rises and sets, and new life is borne as the old dies. Our perception that our species's passing would be tragic or disastrous reflects only our own vanity; the universe is indifferent to us, and one day our kind will have been extinct for as long as the dinosaurs, yet the planet will be here, teeming with new life.