Considering this, can it really be said that both parties are really alike? Comparative advantage is a reality in all facets of life, and it's just the same in politics. Democrats write for the New York Times and Republicans blog. Democrats know how to emote for the TV cameras and Republicans know how to light up the radio airwaves. Democrats know how to win campaigns and Republicans know how to win wars.

Inflation-adjusted GDP figures indicate economic growth at an annual average of 3 percent during the last two decades. GDP may be entirely accurate as a tally of how much our farms, factories, and offices produce, but it?s increasingly inadequate as a measure of how well the economy provides us with what we want. Our ability to choose a balanced life is one of the market?s most important success stories.

I'm not here to defend -- or condemn -- the Times report and have no way of knowing whether Christopher Wallace [aka Notorious B.I.G.] actually did what he's accused of doing. No, what has me shaking my head is that we're even forced to take the allegation seriously.

What does that tell you about the world we have made? ''We'' meaning consumers of American pop culture in general, but African Americans in particular. We've created -- or simply countenanced -- a world in which the line between video fantasy and street-corner reality is all but erased, where thug values and gangster mores demand blood for the faintest slights and we -- still talking African Americans -- walk around acting as if this were as unremarkable as fluorescent lights and traffic jams.

We do not criticize or hold accountable, particularly in forums where whites may be watching, because some of us regard that as an act of racial betrayal. So nobody says the obvious: Pop stars don't shoot each other! There's something wrong when it becomes impossible to distinguish music acts from street gangs.

I understand the corrosive effects of drugs and poverty on the African-American community. I also understand that those effects have been with us for generations. Not to sound dismissive, but that's old news. What's new is these diseased mores and this collective shrug in the face of them.

The lionization of Mumia Abu-Jamal. You've seen him on T-shirts, buttons, fliers, posters, radio shows, Web sites, bumper stickers, and flags. You've read his books, heard his tape-recorded speeches, and watched with disbelief as he's transformed himself from a journalist-turned-cabdriver into a cabdriver-turned-political prisoner. But his story must be heard! Again! Ignore the hundreds of other death row inmates whose guilt has been questioned far more convincingly than Mumia Abu-Jamal's -- free Mumia, and the prison-industrial system will crumble!

The war in Afghanistan is really being waged so oil companies can build a pipeline. Come on, does anyone really think the U.S. military is in Afghanistan to chase the terrorists behind the Sept. 11 attacks? If our armed forces were looking for Osama bin Laden, they would have found him by now, right? Don't believe what you hear about the uncaring United States packing up and moving out once the bombing finishes. We're in Afghanistan to stay -- and to build a gigantic oil pipeline without attracting the notice of thousands of journalists, diplomats, human rights workers, and international military personnel. Not to mention Afghan warlords.

How a big media company imposed its CEO's ideology on every single employee of every single affiliate (even janitors). Once a corporation takes over your formerly independent media enterprise, look out! Everyone will drink Starbucks, listen to Jewel, and forget everything he's always believed about editorial free will. Because, as we all know, that's how journalism works: Every story idea and editorial angle is dictated from the top, and even the most experienced editors, station managers, and columnists are powerless to resist.

The annual unveiling of Project Censored. "We define censorship as any interference with the free flow of information in American society," says project director Peter Phillips in this year's press release. "Corporate media in the United States is [sic] interested primarily in entertainment news to feed their bottom-line priorities. Very important news stories that should reach the American public often fall on the cutting-room floor to be replaced by sex scandals and celebrity updates." And, once every year in the altie press, those stories are replaced by a meaningless list.

REGION: What is the relationship of social capital to human capital?

BECKER: I consider social capital to be a particular type of human capital. Human capital, so to speak, usually looks at a person. It is her knowledge, or her skills. Social capital looks at a person's link to other individuals. If I am involved in AA, I may be obligated to help members who are tempted to drink. In turn, I can call on them if I am having trouble with my alcohol consumption. That is an example of social capital. It is a form of human capital because it is part of me. However, it is very different from the skills I have as an educated person, or the training I have or the knowledge I have. Social capital involves a linkage among individuals. That is why it is "social." It is capital because it has some durability, where depreciation rate may be endogenous. Anyway, that is how I look at it.

Even an isolationist (like myself) believes in self-defense. I don't remember any of the Congressional isolationists raising a fuss about declaring war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. We need another word to describe Ron Paul's head-in-the-sand approach.

Paul has a disease which I have also noticed in the magazine Liberty post-9/11: whatever it is that the government is doing, he is automatically against it.

Webloggers are war-loving, Bush-loving, Republican men who prefer Condi to Hillary.