It must take a lot of effort to remain so bitter constantly. We appreciate that effort - it's always amusing to read your little pearls of misandry.

...but a little voyeuristic. What can we really learn from this? Anything? It seems not.

Meanwhile, I like Heather's work, but she really botched this:

"Armed only with pistols and small guns, we're treated to footage of at least a dozen policemen shuffling around confusedly at the train station, wondering what to do next."

Why are we armed with pistols and small guns to start with? They're not much good while watching a documentary months after the events.

Jerk = immediate turnoff. The guy leaves me more than cold, he leaves me with a slight whiff of disgust. He looks like the kind of asshole who would be drunkenly yelling, "Well FUCK 'EM if they can't take a joke!" while vandalizing someone's car while walking home from a skanky club.

What the hell is wrong with the letter posting system?

It's taking all the paragraph breaks out of my posts.

Are you guys going to make ANY fixes to this hideous hot mess of a site redesign???

Agree with those who said XX was too hard to navigate with too much pointless clicking (much like Salon is now with the dumb "continue reading" link that doesn't even offer up any new ads to justify it).

The other major problem with XX was that you had to re-register a username and password to comment, your Slate account didn't cover XX. Stupid and annoying. Oh, yeah, much like "Open Salon" now, which I've also not registered for and don't read articles in.

@ckgilbertson, don't write down what the voices in your head are saying to you. Out here it looks like a whole lot of crazy.

Ur country is so fucked.

I'm sorry.

I'm really sorry.

He would of been successful in this endeavor by following a tried a true method that 4 officers have used to avoid deployment

I'm sorry, I can't take seriously the comment of anyone who thinks "would've" is spelled "would of".

Your name at the bottom of my previous post is a casualty of the editing process. I WISH SALON WOULD ALLOW US TO EDIT OUR COMMENTS, HINT, HINT.

Firstly I deplore anti-Arab racism, but Islam is an ideology like any other and thus open to any and all criticism.

No argument from me. However, we have absolutely no idea at this point if a) Hasan is a Muslim (although it seems likely b) his being a Muslim had anything to do with his motives (he may have been suffering PTSD-fueled psychosis; he may have been told he was being re-deployed to Iraq and snapped. We just don't know yet). Yet here is Blitzer immediatley drawing lines between his name to his possible ethnicity, and by extrapolation, his potential religion. It's jumping to conclusions, blame-mongering, and sensationalizing, 3 things which no journalist should indulge in.

"At least we agree that Wolf Blitzer is a fucking idiot. Camus and Sartre would have probably agreed on that as well."

Aye, and we could have a beer together on that alone.

-- Ms. Anthropia

...that within three minutes of being provided with the shooter's name, Wolf Blitzer announced - twice - that "It's an Arabic name." What an asshole.

Why wait for a motive? Let the general Muslim- and Arab-bashing begin.

1. Cluttered, garish colour, hard to read.

2. That's the ugliest font I've ever seen.

2. Links don't change colour, can't tell what I've read and what I haven't.

3. Can't tell what's new and what's days old.

4. No link directly to "comments" under headlines. Must click through to story to access comments. Great for ad revenue I'm sure. Annoying as hell to readers.

5. "Continue reading" is an insult.

6. Stuffing all content into some kind of blog format is pointless and annoying (see 5).

7. In fact, my visits to the site are now accompanied by a persistent, nagging feeling of being constantly annoyed while I'm here. I'm doing this to myself why, again?

She shills for the organization, most recently headlining a charity event in Sussex, England.

I think every celebrity who uses their fame and ability to generate publicity to promote this dangerous cult and increase its attractiveness to unwary people should be called out on it - don't you?

...somebody force-read this article to Ayelet Waldman over and over and over again until she understands how to write about parenting without making the reader want to slap you.

"have empathy for the unborn"? That's a neat trick. Care to explain how you can be sensitive to, and vicariously experience, the feelings, thoughts, and experiences of a fetus?

"Meanwhile, some of us at home were yelling into the radio, 'For god’s sake, give the man a hug, Terry!'”

Yes. Give the man a hug. Do something compassionate.

Don't do something unutterably cruel like write a blog post about this incredibly vulnerable moment and headline it with the standard playground mock "Tracy Morgan cries for his mommy".

I agree (and commented in feedback when the site was in Beta) with many of the comments made here - the red is too garish, the front page cluttered and jumbled. For that reason, I didn't stay long on the Beta site.

Now that the redesign has gone live, I've discovered a whole new nuisance. When I click on an article to read, I am presented with the first few paragraphs and a link to "continue to read".

This is because everything has been crammed into a blog format. Every article is part of either a series or a "topic".

I read Salon for feature articles, not blogs, and if I indicate I want to read an article by clicking from the main page, it's just annoying to have to click again every single time to "continue to read".

What does this have to do with Broadsheet?