Anyone notice that the graphics in this ad show gardeners, auto mechanics, restaurant workers, etc.? No doctors, college professors, lawyers or other professions requiring skill and education. I guess McLame really believes that Hispanics are capable of little more than cutting grass or slinging hash.

Then read Amos 8:4 - 8:14. Wright's sermon was firmly in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets. Nothing remarkable here. Of course, nobody listened to them either.

It seems that the article gives short shrift to the value of empirical evidence. The laws of chemistry and physics do provide some level of certainty when used to interpret the outcome of experiments; apples fall to the ground, water boils when heated.

However, we now know (believe?) that we don't understand WHY apples fall to the ground, and Dr. Heisenberg assures us that some of those boiling water molecules are (probably) on the moon. And now they're back! Between these two causes of uncertainty - the physical and perceptual - perhaps nothing is completely knowable; yet how can civilization exist if nothing is knowable?

It's a good thing we didn't realize this before we invented fire or the wheel! All we can do is act on beliefs backed by the best evidence we can generate given all the constraints on "knowledge," and sally forth. I, for one, will continue to believe that it is not a good idea to jump off buildings or put my hand in the boiling pot.

Thank you for educating me on this important issue. There has been so much bombast about superdelegates, it was difficult to figure out their role and purpose. I especially appreciate the history and perspective.

This quality of reporting is why I have remained a huge fan of Salon since becoming a Charter Member many years ago!

Kate, you may not have abandoned the women’s movement, but you have betrayed it. You get to be the poster girl for every misogynist in this country to trot out as a “leading feminist who has chosen two male candidates for President of the United States” over a far more qualified female candidate.

With your history in the women’s movement, you more than most should understand the impact that electing an outstanding woman as President will have on this country – not just for women, but especially for women. If you don’t understand, I recommend to you a recent article by Robin Morgan, “Goodbye To All That (#2),” that you can access at the Women’s Media Center website or at her own. Even my husband understood when he read it!

This is not saying that women who don’t vote for women are turncoats, or that you shouldn’t exercise independent thought. However, when you say you are choosing to support Barack Obama, because his core values are “unity, equality, opportunity and creating an atmosphere of respect and harmony, both nationally and internationally,” you are implying that the female candidate does not share them.

For some reason you are ignoring Hillary Clinton’s 35-year career demonstrating her commitment to those values, the moral courage and leadership she has shown, and the results she has accomplished in improving the lives of millions of people as a leader who is a woman. I also wonder why you question whether Hillary would be “truly great,” given what she has already achieved, but “know” that someone with virtually no track record and the stated belief that being President “is not rocket science” could be.

I wonder, because you have worked in Washington, DC, for decades, and you know how merciless a city it is, and how complex it is to get anything done. Anyone who thinks he can change Washington just by being inspirational is in for a rude awakening. And I believe you know it, because I worked in Washington too, and there’s no way you can NOT know.

So, I don’t understand your motivation for switching your support to Obama, but I do know the impact and believe you do too. To support Hillary all you would have had to do is choose the candidate who shares your stated core values and your experience, who has achieved results in applying those values, and whose terms as President would change the status of women in our country, and thus for everyone in the United States, for the better.

You could have supported the most qualified candidate for President, male or female, we have had in decades, but you chose not to. And you didn’t come close to making your case. It’s a shame!

I had just come to rely on Salon's "daily cultural news digest" first to find out "what was on" talk programs that interested me and second to learn the top gossip/cultural headlines of the day. Now, just finding out what's on The Daily Show and Colbert takes time I could spend reading other more weighty Salon stories. Moreover, as a Salon reader, who could care less about detailed celebrity gossip, I think it was very consistent with our magazine's mission that we were kept informed at least about what was out there. The Fix distilled "the explosion of gossip," then I could use the links if I desired more information.

Moreover, keeping "readers in the dark" is exactly what you did, and that too disappoints me. As a charter premium member, I've come to expect better. First, you told us nothing, then that The Fix was on hiatus. Now you announce a fait accompli, even in the face of your statement that "our gossip coverage has been one of our most popular features going back eight years." You may have made this decision after "much consideration," but with little apparent consultation or concern about the desires of your readers who made gossip coverage (The Fix?) so popular.

I urge you to reconsider your decision to eliminate this feature. I'd like to see exactly the same format returned.