With Mr Cole. I think Obama has it exactly right in ruffling feathers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. These are the two countries that were/are the most responsible for harboring Al Qaeda. Until we ruffle Pakistan's feathers, we can't finish in Afghanistan.

"A woman who'd gone through his problems would have gotten an insufficient monthly check and all the lectures they'd force her to her knees to swallow"

Isn't it a bit sexist to suggest that a woman couldn't have worked through her problems, or is that only expected of a man?

See I still believe it comes down to individual effort. The system I see is one that bestows heroism on single mothers, not single fathers, independent of the ambient temperature. In your example, was the check insufficient, because it was coming from the govt, the deadbeat dad, or because the woman chose to work in a job that paid less? Deep sigh.

Impressive....I take back everything I said. You must be an elitist ! But seriously, what has that got to do with the fact that a drug addict single parent is a loser, male or female? And that single motherhood is akin to sainthood in this country. Spreading BS in the feminist echo chamber among like minded individuals doesn't make it so.

PS I may not have a PhD, but I'd compare paychecks anytime. Oh those choices !

My questions were rhetorical, it's not like your engaging.

I haven't watched the video of the speech, but I did shed more than one tear reading the text...old fool that I am.

Make sure she's not taking ambien. My mom went through some similar issues and it turned out most of her anxiety was from taking ambien regularly.

Who does the name Netroots exclude ? I doubt that anyone would look at that and assume it wouldn't be of interest, it is on the surface inclusionary. Now look at the name BlogHer.....to me this immediately suggests this is a woman's party so unless, your interested in women's issues why bother ? The name conjures up male hating feminists. Independent of the content of these conventions or blogs, it seems the simple fact a group of bloggers would have an all-female conference and name it as such is exclusionary on the surface. What men would be drawn to such a thing....isn't it a sisters only gig ? Complaining about that after the fact just reinforces the victimology stereotype. IMHO women only events hurt women. Whether it's bloggers, women only professional networks, or a women only comic page, there is a clear message that men's input or views are not important. Alienating half the population is not a good way to build credibility.

Or maybe it wouldn't have mattered if digby came out or not.....because of the content of what she was writing. I read her posts before and after the big coming out party. Contrast that with my inability to read posts by Amanda Marcotte or the Shakesville gang.

I can agree with a partial defense relating to domestic abuse....as long as the abuse is physical. I don't think it passes muster if the defense is "he threatened me", or "he made me wear high heel shoes". There should be an established pattern or at least previous occurrence of physical abuse to allow that kind of defense. In order to kill someone you really need to be acting in self defense, and I still believe what I learned in kindergarten, stick and stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me. By the same token I don't support a partial defense that relies on infidelity, I don't think a man should be treated any more lenient because he catches his wife cheating. I suppose in American style justice you might plead temporary insanity, but that's still a reach.

Your example of verbal threatening is not really what I was thinking of. In the example of the defense of a police officer, it is the physical activity which justifies the use of force, not the verbal threat. I would be really surprised to find a case where a verbal threat was used as a defense without the victim having a knife or gun or some other weapon to put an officer in a self defense posture.

Also, I think it is pretty common knowledge that spousal abuse is not a binary behavior. Abusers don't just become that way one day. There is a pattern and history to the behavior that should be easily documented, especially in an environment where a spouse had to resort to killing to stop that abuse.

Here's another example. Let's say my wife of 5 years has never physically struck me before, and there is no history of physical abuse. She finds out today I have been cheating on her and she says she is going to kill me. Am I justified in killing her first ?....not likely. Now if she says she is going to kill me and comes at me with a knife, that is at least more reasonable, but the lack of any prior violence makes it debatable.

If Hillary doesn't get chosen, he remains the extreme nutjob on the outside of the beltway power structure. If Hillary is chosen, he is back in and gets a real job for the next 8 years. Gee, I wonder what his motivation is ?