No. Nils Andersson

Well, the Pleistocene was not so bad. For one thing, "we" had just won a decisive victory in the class struggle - "we" here meaning us mammals. Nils Andersson

Actually, Michelle's math is off. If the "certified Cherokee" holds up, it makes her 1/32 Cherokee, or about 3%. But, the federal government requires 1/16 to qualify. I know, because my wife was 1/16 Indian but flatly refused to use this fact. Our son fails of course, at 1/32. The tribes, however, have varying but stricter requirements than the federal government. Nils

"Today ... 67.3 million Americans -- from college students to retirees to welfare beneficiaries -- depend on the federal government for housing, food, income, student aid or other assistance. ... The United States reached another milestone in 2010. For the first time in history, half the population pays no federal income taxes." This is nuts! Federal income tax was instituted by constitutional amendment in 1913. And for quite a few years, only a small minority had taxable income. And, if you limit "history" to the last handful of decades, you might be technically correct, unless you count (realistically) Social Security and Medicare payments as federal income taxes - they are indeed, except they are not being called that. Nils

Apart from the worries about the solvency of the SS program, and the future inflation, value of money etc etc, there is another point to take into account: SS payments are means tested, currently if you are under 66, and means here are income, not wealth. So if you are still working, postpone at least until age 66. Then, given the coming insolvency, the safest bet is to take out the money even if you don't spend it. Try to invest it wisely. Nils Andersson

"our constitutional freedoms were not lost"jQuery152039684792095957555_1324545608388? Come again. The so-called Patriot act was bad enough. Now interment without trial has been authorized. Fourth amendment anybody? Or posse comitatus??? Nils Andersson

A yes. It is WAY to easy to assert moral equivalence. There are two types of distinctions to be made here. One is the amount of personal risk or sacrifice. Somebody who camps out in Manhattan, while more likely than not going home occasionally to pick up a welfare/unemployment or equivalent check is not really giving up much - he is still hanging out with his friends, The people in Syria are risking their lives, their property and their sacred honour. Another is the stated goals - or lack thereof. The goals of the OWS gang are a little fuzzy at best, but seems to favor the bailout of students (loan forgiveness) but not other bailouts. Whereas the Teapartiers want to REDUCE govt. spending. The Greeks want to expand it. Nils

What is the problem? Most of the factual quotes are correct, except the stuff about the Taliban. And a fleet-footed teenager will run circles around an aging politician. Nils Andersson

Dear Dr. Sowell,

I loved you article, but you got one thing wrong. "Dihydroxymonoxide" would be H2O3,
which AFAIK does not exist. "Hydroxi" refers
to an -OH group, so two of those plus one
oxygen would give H2O3.

The normal foolcatcher name for water is
dihydrogenmonoxide. Others are possible,
depending on which end of the molecule is
your starting point, such as

hydroxihydride
hydrogenhydroxide
oxygendihydride

but not dihydroximonoxide.

Nils Andersson

Mr. Connor has a point - but not nearly as
big a point as he thinks. OK, setting non-
economic damages as low as 250 000 might be
overkill. But this is talking about compensatory
damages.

Punitive damages is another issue altogether.
It means that some lucky recipient (and his
lawyers) get a multi-million windfall based
e.g. on whoever ELSE might have been "torted".

Ridiculous. It is common knowledge that a jury
can be swayed to awarding ridiculour awards
by the likes of John Edwards, and judges are
loath to insert some sanity.

Down boy, down. Make a reasonable case,
not a case to maintain the current
insanity.

Nils Andersson