"Hillary Clinton is not an attractive personality for a lot of people," said O'Brien, who noted that it's "very convenient that the same people who have a sense of discomfort with female authority they prefer not to examine" also object to her personality and record in specific terms, an antipathy they feel comfortable voicing.

Say what? Isn't it possible that people have and voice specific objections to Hillary's record because...oh, I don't know, they have specific objections? Particularly to the way she's tried to claim First Lady photo op duties as substantive policy initatives? That's not a record I'd be proud to claim as a feminist.

Of all the things to go after her for, I don't think this even ranks. Maybe it's her way of communicating to the Joe Sixpacks out there in the "real America" that you don't have to expose your vote to the scorn of the not-so-secret socialists. Won't they feel silly when they discover how wrong their polls are?

Or maybe she really does believe in the privacy of the secret ballot. But that's no fun.

jfriesne -

"Is this sort of of parsing really necessary?

Everybody has their own reasons for entering into sexual relationships, and their reasons are their business. Is it necessary for us to sit in judgement of other people's private decisions?"

If Ms. "Beech" wanted her private decisions left private and unjudged, she wouldn't have written about them. She wants a career in broadcast journalism; she knows the power of the news cycle and the associated buzz, and she wanted to grab some of that. Perhaps we shouldn't be helping her, but what can I say? Sex sells.

One has to wonder about her benefactor's reaction to this essay, though, particularly if someone manages to suss out his identity.

Don't worry, that wasn't a rhetorical question. I think I might just understand the logic here.

We're all agreed that LW is a drama-addict, right? This way, she gets to assuage her ego by being the center of attention as she confesses her feelings. Meanwhile, the poor guy gets to avoid being dragged in beyond having to sit through the performance, unless he's effectively weirded out enough to break the ground rules and declare his non-interest. It's a win-win!

Except for the issue of the roommate, of course. But maybe she could invite him along.

Sure, $7K might not be that much in the grand scheme of things. But it's $7K the letter writer didn't decide to take on himself - nearly double the amount he'd expected he'd need to repay and presumably budgeted for. Had he known he'd be responsible for the extra amount, he might have made different decisions over the course of his college career. As for not wanting to cause a family rift, didn't Dad do that by creating this situation in the first place?

In other words, letter writer: listen to Cary. See the lawyer. Oh, and if your younger brothers don't know about this, consider warning them. They need to be aware that Dad's financial assistance may come with strings attached.

While I also question how much the electorate cares about politicians' musical tastes, I'll accept it as proof that Steele's out of touch, because...well, he is. I still don't understand what the RNC found impressive about him in the first place. His ability to ride the coattails of a one-term governor? He doesn't seem to have used the time to build up his credentials in any substantive fashion. His failed Senate campaign? They must have focused on the charm and managed to ignore that breezy ads about "changing Washington" do not work when a sizable chunk of the voters you need to attract live in the DC suburbs for a reason, and will easily catch you if you try to play "gotcha" on policy issues with your opponent without checking your facts first, or if your staff puts out a bunch of misleading flyers on Election Day.

I do hope the RNC keeps him around, but it has nothing to do with the freshness of his air (or Prince, for that matter). Dude's just clueless.

He keeps using this word, "virgin." I do not think it means what he thinks it means.

...I'd hate to see what the criticism looks like. (No, really, I would. Someone remind me why Salon pays for these ramblings?)

Seriously, if they'd put the last line in the subheader, maybe there wouldn't be all these comments accusing the author of wanting to appear "butch" when he took care to describe himself as just plain quirky, or telling him he ought to be grateful for "friends" who assume far too much familiarity off the bat, or still not getting that an interest in fashion does not equal gaynip, or falling into all of the other stereotypes about relationships between men and women of any sexual orientation.

Then again, I suppose there's not much to be done about that last problem.

Remember Higgins' former student, who's so determined to ferret out Eliza's identity, and proudly declares after much investigation that she's 100%, obviously, undoubtedly Hungarian? Not to cast aspersions on the fine institution your daughter's attending or its staff, but I'll bet this guy's assessment says more about him than it does about her. You and your extended family have known her for years; you'd think you'd have noticed something was off if it was.