I get the point, and it's a sad truth. But your space here is too valuable to be duplicating the same issue over and over again. Let me see Salon report on the threat of oil trading in euros.

I don't care about the issue of sexuality here. What bothers me is the, "... but it's what he wants" part. Do you give a 4-year-old everything he or she wants? This is pretty damn scary. Our world is turning into a bunch of kids in adult clothing sucking off anyone who gives them what they want because parents like you never taught them the word "no!" and how to grow up!

Camille Paglia represents (well, I might add) those of us who can't take either party respectfully. She effectively takes each party's extreme posturing and whacks it on the head. A good move that both parties deserve. Will the Centrist Party ever materialize? I so, so wish. In the meantime, it's nice to have Salon present someone who reads between the party lines and isn't afraid to tell us what she sees. Sure, she's a bit "out there," but it's only because her territory is so new that the response to it here is so vile. At least, I'd like to think that's the reason. The closed minds here in the letter round-up scare me as much as all the candidates do this season.

I appreciated the article, immensely. Truthful and honest, it was a reflection on a sad reality: welfare -- whether you spell it with a capital "W" or a lower-case "W" -- doesn't work. My only criticism of Dickerson (and I'm sure she's learned that lesson) is that she should've said "no" much sooner. As for this being a matter of race, that's baloney. I didn't know Dickerson was a black writer until I read the comments, and I don't even recall in the article if Mary and the kids were black or white. It doesn't matter. The fact is that as long as people have no incentive to work and plenty of incentives NOT to work (i.e., handouts, formal or informal), then you'll always have the same outcome. And there's nothing gray about that. I participate in the Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) program, and I'm starting to feel much less tolerant of aide recipients (of any kind) than I did when I started. That's not the way the BBBS program is supposed to work.

Here I was ready to read some positive prose about a politician now that Obama is in the ring, and Salon is tearing him up. As one reader said, Salon is doing so without reporting his actual track record. Come on, Salon, leave the bullshit to Fox and give us the GOODS on Obama! I'm ready for him, aren't you, for God's sake?

I'm tired of all FOUR Clintons and Bushes, and I'm thrilled about the prospect for someone with VERY LITTLE EXPERIENCE in DC!

After briefly reading all this, I make an appeal for all my time back. I can't understand why the Edwards campaign hired a loose cannon like this in the first place.

She writes:

"Reasonable people... (C)an tell the difference between a personal blog post and those I'll write for the campaign."

They can't; she shouldn't have expected them to (I mean, our president can't even tell the difference between terrorists and insurgents). Lesson learned, she should move on. And I suggest she do so at some point in her career in a more "professional" environment than that of the blogworld. There is but one public venue and she tried to live separate identities in two. That's just reckless.

BTW, I'm a progressive feminist (not a "wingnut") and former journalist. The latter is a profession; blogging in the context of a purposeful campaign could've been this woman's profession but she blew it because she was unprofessional. If Edwards hadn't fired her, I hope he was getting ready to do so.

I like what Fleebie Shrike had to say. And I pity him, I really do. I have the same problem with my breasts. Once, a man told me mine weren't big enough and he dropped me (good riddance, of course). Now, they seem to have gotten bigger on their own -- so much that even I'm intimidated by them! We just can't be happy, can we, us single folks? It's always something...

That was a wonderful piece, not to mention pretty damn scary. We're not only dumbing down our society, we're numbing down our society.

I especially was impressed with the point, "... the kind of confidence you get not from testing yourself, but from 'believing' in yourself." Absolutely, and it's going to ruin future generations. I have a "Little Sister" through the Big Brothers, Big Sisters program, and I view this self-esteem crap that she's picked up somewhere as I did the stock market of early 2001 -- with no substantial backing. It's going to crash one day.

We are floating on black or white; there is no gray anymore because only a precious few have intellectual curiosity or skills in critical thinking. Things are one way or another; people or good or bad. Others' feelings are real or worthless.

I find a certain relief to crawl online and discover some sense of community in like-minded Salon contributors. So, keep doing this type of writing. It's a nice head-nodding read, if a frightening one.