You say: "I have contended that Clinton's attacks are generally more baseless -- and that she is not a defender of progressive values."

I contend that Obama's are just as baseless, so who can win this game? Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. As far as Clinton not being a defender of progressive values: if this is so, why is she getting the votes of those who most appreciate and stand to gain from those values - women, blue collar workers, those with lower incomes...the core Democratic base? Why is she often cited as having done the most to advocate for women and children, not to mention minorities? The reality for me is that Obama talks a good game about progressive values (when he remembers to), but his record doesn't support his claims.

You say: "By women, you mean white women, presumably? By blue collar workers and lower income voters, you are also speaking of Caucasians?

I would presume so. And I'm not sure how you're going to square the argument that African-American voters aren't [a] progressive or [b] the core Democratic base."

Okay, KCM, who put the toad in your coffee this morning? Your last post was willfully myopic and had that unpleasant aroma of implied racism which has had its ugly day in the sun. Would you please retire this indecent strategy once and for all?

Also, are you possibly the last person in the country to learn that Obama is getting nearly the entirety of the black this time around? Why is he taking the black vote away from the spouse of the First Black President? I refer readers to the South Carolina stratagem, so neatly illustrated by your message.

Please take the blinders off. And yes, you were implying that, due to white myopia, I was oblivious to the presence of blacks in the traditional Democratic base, as did deloresflowers subsequently. I lived in New Orleans, by choice, for 30 years as a white minority. I daresay I'm probably better acquainted with political dynamics as they relate to black voters than 99.9% of those posting on this site. There were approximately three and a half black Republican voters in New Orleans. And I did notice.

You are vile and if there were a mechanism on this site to report abusive messages, I'd utilize it in a second. I simply cannot imagine what how awful it must be to live with someone like you in real time.

Now you're being really, really willfully obtuse. Yes, black voters comprise an essential element of the traditional Democratic voter base. Yes, they are overwhelmingly voting for Barack Obama and not Hillary Clinton this time around. They have been voting for him ever since South Carolina, when the Clinton's became overnight racists. Therefore, I did not include blacks in my description of core Democrats who are voting for Hillary Clinton. She is only receiving a small percentage of black votes. Would you like me to clarify further? You're beating this to death. Fini. Onward.

I'm sorry, but I got sidetracked with the silliness above. I will respond later, but I absolutely have to get dressed and do something other burn up the keyboard this afternoon. This site is far too seductive...

What mr. tom has done is to conflate my screen name with a product called Kotex, a major brand name back in the 50s and 60s when he was a budding misogynist. Kotex may still be produced (I have no idea since, contrary to recent popular opinon, I'm not a grad student but rather the same age as Hillary Clinton). What is it? A sanitary napkin for girls and women to use during their menstrual periods. In its used state, Kotex was considered an object of disgust - unsanitary, dirty, repulsive, to be shunned.

Is it clear now why I find mr. tom a nasty SOB?

This message may constitute a new low for salon.com, but you can thank mr. tom for its appearance. And now back to work.

You're right up in there in the pantheon of vile, along with mr. tom. You know, I began posting on salon.com because I thought I might learn something new while debating with what originally seemed like fairly intelligent folks. I now realize I've stumbled into what is too often a vipers nest of self-inflated, hypocritical, cultural snobs with shivs for tongues. This by no means applies to all those who post on this site, but it's happening too often for comfort, and it's practically guaranteeing I will never vote for Obama. The ugliness I've seen coming from his supporters has been simply stunning and it has left me in tears on more than one occasion. BTW, your acidic attempts to strip others of their dignity is quite telling. This is the hallmark of those who preach one thing and practice another. In other words, you're not a liberal, not in any sense of the word. You're a hypocrite.

I will contact the editors. And I will respond to the posters you mentioned when I calm down. I just stopped in for a moment while working to post about mr. tom, because I foolishly let him get to me in the past couple of days. Then things went downhill from there. I simply cannot believe how upsetting and nasty this primary season has gotten...what a shame.

I did have a chance to vote for David Duke in the 1990s. There was a popular bumper sticker in New Orleans back then which read, "Vote For the Crook - It's Important." And I did vote for the crook for Louisiana governor (Edwin Edwards, who's now in prison) because it WAS important. You see, I've lived what you can only preach about. I know who I am - and you don't.