Horton hears every creature, no matter how small, because they are people too. It has nothing to do with fetuses. Animals are sentient, independent beings that should have rights too. Fetuses are not.

The question asked if solar could meet all of our energy needs, and Pablo only talked about electricity demand. Electricity accounts for only a minority of energy consumed in America. Count everything else and you will end up needing a lot more than 1/3 of Rhode Island to meet that demand, but in fact electricity is simply not a viable substitute for many of these purposes (flying a jet plane, for instance).

Although you would get better advice than you will from Cary.

You're not a landlord, he's not a tenant. He doesn't pay rent. He's a non-paying guest. It's as simple as not letting him back in. If he causes trouble, call the police. You will get another restraining order if he tries to break into your house or assault you. End of story.

Best Salon comic ever too, perhaps.

I love you Carol! You are a true hero.

but I'd like the cornucopian cheerleaders over at BusinessWeek to explain to me how I can eat knowledge, heat my home with knowledge, and travel on knowledge power.

Oh right, they will explain with insulting condescension, that "knowledge-driven increases in efficiency" will enable us to better utilize available resources to provide more food, energy, and so on from the same resources.

Wonderful.

But "efficiency" is most certainly not an unlimited resource. Supposing we can increase our utilization efficiency from, say, 30% to 97% for a given resource. That's a big improvement. We gobble up this efficiency in no time with exponential growth. Now our unlimited reserve of "knowledge" can give us another boost, from 97% to 98 or even 99.9% efficiency. In other words, it can give us nothing at all. It has only delayed the inevitable "end of the growth line." Exponential growth comes to a crash.

On another point I would argue that knowledge is not actually an unlimited resource, but that is not necessary.

You really are landed gentry.

Broadsheet weighs in on the guilt of an accused sex pervert and lambasts the judicial process for not hanging him, based on her undoubtedly superior legal reasoning and deductive ability gained from press clippings.

Please, can we STOP with these Reader's Digest "That's Outrageous!" fluff pieces that damage nothing more than the credibility of this column? Can we at least agree that someone accused of a heinous crime deserves a fair hearing on the facts and due process, and that a finding of guilt belongs to the legal system and not to a pundit on the other side of the world with a chip on her shoulder?

You weren't in the room of the alleged crime scene and you have no idea what happened. You know nothing about Korean law and you did not watch the trial trial, read the transcripts, and you have only the most superficial, cursory familiarity with this case. So mind your own damn business.

Q: What affect do you think it's going to have on your campaign?

should have been transcribed as:

Q: What effect do you think it's going to have on your campaign?

Fix please.

It was highly inappropriate for Baca as a member of Congress to accuse CNN of "overstepping the bounds of the First Amendment" which is clearly erroneous. The bounds of the First Amendment are more than wide enough to accommodate Lou Dobbs' corpulent carcass. However, as others have noted, it is fit and proper for a congressman to take public exception to a news network's systematic purveyance of ignorant and hateful rhetoric under the guise of journalism as a matter of public policy.

But as far as freedom of speech and the press go, strong-worded editorials are an ancient bulwark of the republic. Baca should protest, but he cannot repress.

n/t

You don't care about these people yet you don't want them to consider it the "last straw" and not be friends with you anymore? Obviously you are concerned with what these people think about you, not your friendship, which basically means that you are concerned about your own self-esteem, because what someone who is not part of your life thinks about you is irrelevant.

So RSVP that you are not going, send a well-wishing note if you want, and don't bother with the gift unless you feel your money is disposable. Times are hard, and just because someone is fool enough to get married does not entitle them to the largesse of everyone they have ever associated with, whether it is their first or subsequent go-round.

This is from the same guy who pushes the "Babes in Bikinis for 9/11 Truth Video" :

http://revver.com/watch/254292/flv/affiliate/54012/

This is a waste of storage to promote such a marginal weirdo.

I'm pleasantly surprised to see this mentioned, because I was intending to donate mine to an abortion fund. Note that it is probably better to pick a member abortion fund and donate to it rather than the umbrella group, to support the programs directly.

It is not simply people eating more rice. The article notes that per capita rice consumption is set to increase 0.5%. Meanwhile, world population is increasing by more than 1% in the same time period. Obviously, it is population, not appetite, that is primarily driving demand; it is the additional 77 million extra mouths eating rice, not just the 6,700,000,000 eating 300 more grams of rice next year.

So to put it more correctly, it is more people eating more rice.

It was courteous of Salon to allow him Dr. Amen a response, but he acquits himself very poorly. I too have been appalled to see his infomercials tainting PBS and will contact my local stations to ask them to stop airing it. I wonder if this has anything to do with the Bush administration's stacking of the CPB board.