And not to forget what this award is about even more than Gore. If half of what we think we know about global warming is true, people will look back fifty years from now on the claims that "War on Terror" was the defining challenge of this century and see it as a very sick, sad joke

It could be sicker and more ironic than even that, if the worst we believe about global warming is true. Consider the future school kid reading about the 2000 election and all the key locations in deciding the victor:

Palm Beach, Florida: Elevation 7 ft
Miami, Florida: Elevation 6 ft
Fort Lauderdale, Florida: Elevation 9 ft

Posted at October 12, 2007 4:32 AM in response to Gore Nobel Discussion

Having just celebrated year 17, I'm not a fan of this theory. :-)

I read once that the average marriage duration has basically not changed in generations, despite the higher divorce rate we see today. The reason for this is people now live longer.

In other words, divorce is a death substitute.

Posted at July 26, 2006 10:23 AM in response to Marriage's Heartbreak Hill

I was under the impression that most people who believed in a coming apocalypse weren't particularly upset at the idea. Those that believe don't expect to be among those Left Behind.

On the other hand, my generation (X?) tended to believe we might experience an apocalypse because we grew up under the threat of nuclear armageddon. It wasn't an irrational thought at the time but a very real possibility.

Posted at May 12, 2006 3:14 PM in response to Things I Didn't Know

I believe in civil unions for liberal reasons; everyone deserves equal protection under the law I believe in gay marriage for conservative reasons; love, honor, commitment and family. 

Posted at February 23, 2006 3:45 PM in response to Whither same-sex marriage?

Wes Clark also lives in both worlds and shares that dual persona.  There may be others.

Posted at October 7, 2005 3:16 PM in response to Meritocrats and Aristocrats

<span class="Apple-style-span">"Under the circumstances we still had -- and have -- a moral obligation to do the best we can in terms of consolidating a decent government..."</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">
</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">You were talking about Afghanistan, but this statement holds true for Iraq as well.  The reasons we went in don't change the moral obligation.</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">
</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">Iraq is now in the middle of a civil war.  If we leave it has the strong possibility of turning into genocide.  We can't let that happen.</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">
</span&gt<span class="Apple-style-span">I'm not claiming to know how to solve the Iraqi delima, but I still don't believe just leaving is the key.</span&gt

Posted at September 16, 2005 1:38 PM in response to Meanwhile, In Afghanistan

This conference includes both Democrats and Republicans, so this really isn't the forum to sort out the official Democratic position on foreign policy, but it is the perfect forum to figure out the correct foreign policy.
Personally, I hope the Democrats choose to go with the correct policy, regardless of politics.

Posted at September 7, 2005 4:46 PM in response to Next Stop: A Strategy

Forcing cable companies to sell channels <span class="Apple-style-span">à la carte</span&gt just seems like a really bad idea for all those reasons already given.  However, I do believe a user should be able to unsubscribe to any channel he or she chooses to, for parental control, but I don't see any reduction in cost from such a choice. 
Politically, though, I see the selling point.

Posted at July 26, 2005 11:03 AM in response to Sense on Media Regulation