"If he compromises with the likes of Chuck Grassley after Grassley betrayed him, he can give up the rest of his agenda -- and maybe even a second term."

I agree. 100%. I would like to agree with your last line, too, about trusting Obama to know when he's being punked. I'm not sure that evidence leads me to that conclusion. I am an Obama fan, but I'm really exasperated!

Wow! I see very little evidence of that kind of determination. I hope he doesn't become a one-term President. I will continue to support him. I don't see a better alternative on the horizon. But what I do see is a President that thinks winning over Republicans is more important than keeping his base.

Must the lying crazies win?

Thank you, Joan. I was cheering for you on Hardball. "The dream lives on and the hope will never die."

I think it was last season or, maybe the first season, that Carla, the black maid, was accused of something she didn't do. She left the Drapers but was called back because they couldn't do without her. HOWEVER, grandpa Gene did not accuse Carla of stealing the $5. At least not yet. And I hope he doesn't or that the young daughter doesn't. Gene knows who took his $5 and let's hope he's got some decency left. We don't need to go through the false accusation scenario again.

Amy, what were you smoking?

I don't know what kind of credentials Martin has but I know she's no feminist. Describing Couric and Sawyer as "newsmommies" and using that as a putdown is very anti-feminist.

Although Couric is a mother and Sawyer is not, I have never detected that to be reflected in the way they handle their professional duties. I would be interested in who Martin thinks is a model of non-momminess that could deliver the news in a non-mommy fashion. Fatigue-attired Christine Amanpour? (whom I admire greatly) and who is a mommy; Rachael Madow, who is not a mommy, and who is also wonderful. I could go on. But the point is, "newsmommy" is a ridiculous classification.

Why can't the rest of us? Indeed. I forgive her. Very overblown. It was unsporting and over-the-top. She acknowledged it. She lost. What do people want?

Excellent! even instructive,and there are endless possibilities . . .

Your friend Chris Matthews . . .

I like you, Joan, but can't you find another show to appear on?

Interesting information on Evan Thomas. Who would have thought that genes could get so diluted so quickly.

Yes, give us more book reviews. This one was enlightening and I happen to agree fully with you about the way the press treated the Clintons. Also I have never understood the adulation for Tim Russert. I would say more, but feel restrained because who wants to speak ill of the dead? But what I still don't understand is why did the press, almost uniformly, trash the Clintons continually? Yes, Bill Clinton had flaws, but the press' vendetta went much beyond criticizing his flaws. As you say, they were vicious. And so toward Hillary when she ran for President. Why did they hate him? and to some extent, still do.

I haven't read "The Clinton Tapes" yet. Its size is a little off-putting. I did hear Taylor Branch discuss it. I can understand why some parts seemed tedious to you. Mr. Branch, although undoubtedly a noted historian, is tedious. He hasn't learned to synthesis and he over-answers every question.

Very funny! What's wrong with many of Salon's readers? Have they lost their sense of humor? or, in their earnestness, did it get smothered? Lighten up!

I did agree with one of the earnest ones - Salon's new format is a mess.

Now I understand why The Reader's Digest has always appealed to conservatives.

I really, really dislike the clutter of your "all-new Salon." I often can't find the article I'm looking for and I really dislike clicking on one headline only to have something different pop up.

I liked the clear design of the "old Salon." It was readable. Isn't that the most important criterion? Some days I just give up.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Dear God,

Please make sure Obama and his close circle of advisors read Anne Lamont's letter and then get off their duffs to take bold action. Lots of people are depending on him . . . and on you!

Thank you.

So NARAL is getting on its high horse of moral outrage? Well, let them remember how they sold out someone who has spent her entire public life working for women's reproductive rights.

What a crock!

"Going Rogue" - memoir or fiction? Who says we make distinctions between these two literary forms?

I heard you debate another woman on TV about the Newsweek cover. I agreed with you and was really annoyed with the other woman. Problem was I hadn't seen the cover yet. Later I retreived Newsweek from my mail box. Joan, I do not think this is a sexist cover. Her running shorts are modest. She's not wearing a shirt unzipped to her naval, she's not wearing a come-hither look, etc. She looks like what she is: someone who wants to wrap herself in the American flag and who tries to present herself as the all-American athletic, busy woman.

Save your outrage against Mechan for your friend Chris Matthews who is far more sexist but whose show you patronize.

Sadly, ole Joe knows the Democrats all too well. He knows he can act with impunity and treachery and the Homeland Security Committee Chair is still his.

Will someone please explain to me why the Senate keeps requiring a supermajority to pass a bill? When can just a good ole' majority be used?