I hear what you are saying, but one benefit of the Iraqis driving us out would be to disabuse us once and for all that the world is not our personal playground to muck around in as we will.

Too many Americans have turned against the war not because it was totally wrongheaded from its conception, but because they think it should have been done better. As if we had a clear and obvious right to kill whomever we pleased because it pleased us to kill them.

America makes a choice, innocent people die by the tens of thousands, and we expect them to respond with gratitude! Amazing! I don't care how it is accomplished, but something needs to happen that will humble the snotty arrogance out of us.

You write too fast, you make mistakes. Edit the first sentence in my last post as follows:

I hear what you are saying, but one benefit of the Iraqis driving us out would be to disabuse us once and for all of the idea that the world is our personal playground to muck around in as we will.

That is all.

Lying is easy; all you have to do is never tell the truth.

But hey! You know what's even easier? Telling the truth! Just tell the truth and there are so many extra levels of brainwork you just don't have to do. A reporter asks you a question, you answer, and spit, spot, boom, you're done! No need for anxiety or wondering if you're up to the task, or any of that crap.

So, yeah, as a person who only wants the best for you, that's what I'd advise you. Just tell the truth.

I don't like being offered your two choices, and that they are the only two possible candidates for discussion. It's either one or the other, eh? That triggers every rebellious nerve in my body and makes me want to fight back.

It's a trait I picked up as a young lad from watching reruns of "The Prisoner," watching Patrick McGoohan outwit and humiliate a new No. 2 every episode was definitely a driving factor in my lifelong inability to "get with the program."

I wonder if either "The Sopranos" or "The Wire" would have the power to change someone's whole world view for life?

I haven't seen "The Wire," never really could get into "Sopranos," liked Twin Peaks a whole heck of a lot. I can stlll remember in great detail my visceral reaction to specific dialogue and visual elements as if I'd just seen it within the last month: "She's dead... Wrapped in Pla-stic."

I hate to sound all Hippy-Dippy, but the older I get, the more obvious it becomes to me that there is a carefully worked out balance in the natural world that simply can't be ignored. Balance, there is a balance. As Dyson might understand it better, there is an equal sign in the middle of all things. What is done on one side of that equal sign will change the result on the other side.

We remove the predators from an ecosystem, their prey increase and eat all the young aspen trees destined to shade the stream bed; the water heats up, fish have a hard time and begin to die off.

Farmers demand water to be siphoned off for their crops, there is not enough water to flush young fish down into the ocean; a couple of years later, the fishing industry falls into decline; it's barely worth it, for some fishermen, to gas up their boats.

These are two simplified examples, but I think they make the point. Dyson sees a world where humans can live and behave in any manner they like, do anything they want on their side of the equation because it either has no effect on the other side, or if it did, what happens on the other side doesn't mean much anyway. Even if we screw things up on the other side, and ecosystems fall into collapse, what do we care? We can always whip out our gene-splicing kits and conjure up some plant or animal that poops gasoline Flippity Doo!

What a horrible world he postulates. Horrible and horrifying. Who wants to life in genetic-splice world with 100 billion people? I don't, even if I believed it was possible. Climate change is effecting an enormously complex equation, and I think we could see ripple effects on the other side that we can't even begin to imagine yet, wreaking biological, sociological, and economic changes at a rate that will leave us breathless in our attempts to keep up. And really, for what? Why is the idea that we should try to reduce our footprint on the planet so laughable and abhorrent? What is the downside to that lifestyle?

When you're waiting around to see if you got the job or not, you're going to need a little walking around money. Something to tide you over.

When you do the math at that rate, the poor man was only pulling down $3,350 per week or $160, 800 a year. As these public servants are constantly reminding us, that's nothing compared to what they could be earning in the private sector. A paltry pittance. Tony Snow recently quit saying he couldn't make it on a similar salary, and who can blame him? For that salary, it's a wonder he even got out of bed each day. He couldn't win for losing.

I'm surprised you want to make something out of this. I mean, come on! It's not like he's one of these illegal aliens risking his life in the desert crossing the border just so he can wash dishes, pick crops or clean motel rooms, and otherwise deprive decent Americans of similar lucrative careers. Stick to the real issues, Salon!

Lest anyone be confused, the above was written with my usual contempt and sarcasm at the way things work in our war driven economy. I do this in lieu of screaming in horror and despair until I'm dead.