I've enjoyed most of your columns about the election, but I don't agree with you this time. I voted for Sen. Clinton, but was deeply impressed and inspired by Sen. Obama's comments.

One of the best speeches made by a presidential candidate in a long time.

Susan McGee

Well, I voted for Sen. Clinton in the California primary in part because of the disgusting sexism that has been directed against her, in part because I didn't see too much difference between she and Sen. Obama ideologically, and I thought that her experience would enable her to accomplish more in office, and in part because I had not been convinced of Sen. Obama's sincerity.

His speech on race has changed my mind.

I have said repeatedly that I will be working for whomever wins the Democratic nomination.

What Sen. Obama's speech has changed is my enthusiasm for him.

I couldn't help being impressed by his thoughtfulness, but also his courage and integrity.

Contrast HIM with George Bush. Or with Dick Cheney -- who wants to overturn the D.C. ban on handguns - unbelievable!

And perhaps Obama's ability to inspire people with his rhetoric will compensate for his lack of pragmatic political

experience.

So, Mr. Greenwald, I've sent emails to both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton strongly suggesting that they spend half of their time pointing out problems with McCain rather than with each other, but they haven't responded. Perhaps you could do so?

Because.....if Sen. Obama is nominated, the right will pull out all the stops to tap into the deep racism that exists in this country.

For a long while, they assumed Sen. Clinton would be the nominee, and they have pulled out the stops to tap ino the deep sexism that exists in this country.

I hope and pray that Sen. Obama is right, and the country IS ready for a change.

We've got to elect a democrat.....the war, katrina, the war,

our civil rights, the patriot act, the environment, global warming, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

Susan McGee

This is appalling. We humans should never have been given authority and power over other animals.

I am disgusted that I am the first person to post concerning these issues.

Would we treat a cat or dog this way? Put them with a family for a year or two, then return them to the pound, and keep them in a cage?

The chimpanzee is willy nilly grabbed from his family and put into cages with other chimps? That's cruel., and outrageeous.

The chimpanzee is MUCH closer to humans than a cat or a dog....

IF, in fact, the chimpanzee caused a problem as he or she got older..in his or her foster home, then it should have been dealt with on an individual basis...a plan should have been created that would have gradually introduced him or her into a different environment. Their human family should have visited him or her at various times.

You said:

"When George W. Bush, icon of the moralistic right, all but admitted he smoked dope and did a few lines in his "young and foolish" days, he probably did more to end America's drug hysteria than a thousand policy papers."

Really? It did more to end America's drug hysteria? Well then, why are all these people in prison for life due to a three strike rule? Why are poor people in prison for doing crack, while rich people are free for doing cocaine? Bush didn't do diddly squat for anyone but other rich white men.

Personally, I have never believed that stuff two consenting adults do together is wrong.

However, that doesn't include women and girls trapped in prostitution who are being used, abused, and consumed by men who are interested in being serviced.

Spitzer contemptuously used women, and that's why he should have quit. And, instead of telling his wife that he had screwed up, and there was no reason for her to be there to make him look good, he asked his wife to stand beside him. Of course, everyone criticizes her,and no one asks why someone who cheated, hired a woman to service him, and then asked his spouse to cover for him should be respected.

The progressive male left is once again screwing women.

They will defend to the death their right to use, and consume, and wallow in pornographic images of women being used, abused, and consumed.

No, I'm not about to criminalize their usage. But I will morally condemn it.

I think that there ARE some men who are interested in a great love..who want to be with, and make love with, a woman with whom they are in a committed relationship. I was ruminating on this today, and thought about Alan Alda, and Peter Jackson, and Vigo Mortenson, and Paul Newman, and Al Gore. and gosh, maybe Barack Obama It is really anti-male to assume that every famous, powerful man is going to take advantage of his power to use women or girls (or boys or men).

Maybe every famous man doesn't think he's entitled to use women (or boys or men) trapped in prostitution (by abuse, by poverty, by racism, by sexism, by homphobia). Maybe there are a bunch of famous, powerful men who are ethical, care about their partners, and try to do the right thing.

If they don't, well, maybe they shouldn't be in office. Maybe they should be stripped of their power.

Maybe you boys shouldn't be so quick to demonize, discredit, misunderstand and distort feminism.

Susan McGee, Eureka, CA