I hate to be politically incorrect, but rape can be about sex. If we accept that the main definition of sex is procreation, then men who rape women might be leaving behind descendants, especially in the old days when conquering soldiers were allowed three days of rape and pillage in conquered cities. So a soldier who rapes a conquered woman and makes her pregnant has committed a sex act successfully. After all the Romans got their population going by raping the Sabine women. These days most raped women would not carry a baby to term, but if they were committed fundamentalists they would. Homosexual rape then cannot be about sex. In fact no homosexual act is then sex, it's just using your sex organs for other purposes.

I would not be surprised if Ahmadinejad was not educated in Persian culture (as opposed to our Pres who is not educated in anything). The descendants of Chingis Khan, Babur being the leading example, were well educated in Persian art and poetry. Throughout the world Ahmadinejad probably won the propaganda war of his visit hands down, as opposed to our boorish leadership, especially that nitwit Pres of Columbia.

Persian culture is a dominant cultural force in Central Asia and has been for thousands of years. American culture will be long forgotten and Persian culture will still be around in the future.

This whole argument about "homosexual" culture is total bullshit, and just another attempt by Big Oil to foment a war. You guys are really gullible.

The housing market put off major price reductions by selling houses at inflated prices to people who could not afford them. If the average income in the US is $50,000 then the average house has to sell for 3X that, or $150,000. We got a long way to go before the market clears. Bush and his cronies will do their best to put off the inevitable until the next Pres and congress take office.

Our esteemed governor, Butch Otter, was all ready to get one of our Republican stalwarts in to replace Craig. That would have given him a leg up as an incumbent. Now he'll have to run cold turkey, assuming Craig decides to retire. If Craig decides to run in 2008 the Texas oil money that goes to our Republican candidates will be used to defeat Craig in the primary. Craig may just be pissed off enough at the GOP to be a spoiler. He loyally voted for every stupid thing they wanted. However, Mike Crapo, who will become the senior Idaho senator if Craig does not remain, has the notoriety of having voted for Clinton's impeachment in the house, and then voting for all four articles when he hot appointed to the senate. He is even more a lackey than Craig ever was.

The rise of the Himalayas is causing our present climate of repeated ice ages. We've temporarily averted the next one by our human-induced CO2 increases. Maybe we have done a little overkill on the aversion, but in 200 years when all the fossil fuel is gone the ice sheets will return. Before the Himalayas rose the Earth was a lot warmer than it is now, and was that way for many millenia. The seas were 400 feet deeper and the only ice was on Antarctica. Warm seas and lots of beaches, who can be against that?

If you want to slow down this temporary warming, push for lots of nukes, besides the windmills, etc. My neighbors and I live 40 miles downwind of over 50 decommissioned nukes. We all sleep well at night, as opposed to the coal executives who are afraid of nukes.

I thought he didn't used to believe in man-caused global warming. I've never doubted it, but don't see it as a catastrophe. At least not compared to the other catastrophes that might befall us. Climate change has always been with us and caused severe population crashes, epidemics, wars, etc. We cannot control the Earths climate, except around the margins.

We have drastically overpopulated the Earth, and Gaia does not like it. Climate fluctuations are only one way that will cull the excess humanity. We will be entering the next (overdue) ice age in a few hundred years. That might stress the human race more than this (temporary) warming. We will need lots of nukes or fusion or whatever to run the greenhouses that will be needed to grow our food.

I live in Idaho, far from the (hazardous) coastal plain, where only fools will continue to live. I'm enjoying the balmy winters that are now very seldom below zero. The snow pack has been a little sparse lately, but our area has a long history of extended droughts (50 years occasionally) so I don't think that is a result of global warming.

The local farmers grew lots of corn this year, for ethanol of course. That would not have been possible with the short growing season we had 20 or more years ago. So up to now we have seen only benefit from the warming. As our esteemed leader pointed out, "bring it on".