...is the wearing of t-shirts with 1970s toy logos on them (Pac-Man, Slinky, Shrinky-Dinks, etc.) because they're "ironic."

The only thing that make you ironic is that you have no idea what the definition of irony is.

Actually, most of the people I've seen wearing those are wearing them because they're fun or nostalgic. I have a few vintage cartoon t-shirts I wear for fun, and adorable Gen-Y sales clerks perk up when they see them. It cracks me up.

Things are more like Red Bull than people generally give them credit for being-- some people wear 'ironic' shirts, some sport Strawberry Shortcake logos proudly because they're 'cute.' In a world with little tribal culture left, logos-- or their lack-- are significant; they show where we've self-designated ourselves.

It's probably too much to ask, but I'd love to see a lunch with Geraldine Ferraro. Ask for her thoughts on winning women and Reagan Democrats. Explain that being the first serious black presidential candidate is a little harder than maybe it looked.

You're probably not reading these letters any more, Joan, but if you are, you might not want to refer to the Democratic nominee for President as though he was a ten-year-old boy with his sneakers untied. It doesn't have much to do with is well-planned campaign strategy, and it has some rather unpleasant connotations.

And I don't want to see Obama lunching with Ferraro any more than I would have wanted Candidate Clinton meeting with Al Sharpton. I think Obama does have to reach out to Clinton's supporters, but I'd prefer he not break bread with extremists and demagogues.

For about three or four years now, at least. And are they really ditching the cat for a cellphone? Every kid loves cats.

The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles got a reboot/brand about five years ago, for that matter. Didn't you see the movie last summer?

You're missing that you're reading Salon, therefore Obama did something wrong. We're not sure what, but we'll figure it out!

And why would one want to see this film if one is not a doctrinaire leftist and/or red-diaper baby?

If someone was interested in good movies? Hard to believe, I know, but Spartacus is legendary for good reason. Hundreds of movies come out a year about artists' influences and inspirations; should we ignore everyone affected by the blacklist because we're still not completely over it? I'd argue the opposite.

Sure, you're a nerd who doesn't bother to leave the house but someday a hot assassin chick will drag you out of your boring life and bring you into a super secret society. It turns out you're really special and talented and you just didn't know it.

Did Moses or Luke Skywalker beat you up when you were a kid or something? "Ordinary bloke gains extraordinary abilities" is hardly a plot confined to the 00's.

Use grade B if you can find it. Much more flavor and cheaper.

And while we're at it, no animal living in captivity will ever be happy. Can we all just agree on that? All of this free-range, cage-free, happy farmed animals who are just begging you to slit their throats because they're just so happy nonsense is nothing more than shameless and shameful self-delusion. If someone really believed that animals deserved any happiness at all, then they'd never think that those animals deserved to be thought of as nothing more than tomorrow's dinner.

And what do we then do with the domesticated animals that can no longer live without us? If you take 'tame' turkeys and set them 'free,' they'll be fox food in a day or two. What bliss! Self-delusion isn't confined to the meat-eaters.

Thanks for sharing with us. Perhaps you should stop eating human flesh and move back to bacon.

And he is us.

I just think that the David Reimer case illustrates that children, gender theory, and scalpels (and by extension other "therapies") make a very poor mix. While his case most certainly does make the argument that gender sense is indeed in-born, it also makes the argument that screwing around with it, particularly in the case of a child, is very very dangerous.

I think that's what's so great about the hormone therapy-- and I don't understand why even the opponents aren't hailing it as an option. It gives young adults more time to grow up, to get any or all needed psychological treatment, to come to terms with a gender identity that's clearly seen by far too much of the population with fear and disgust. (I can't imagine why transgendered people end up depressed or unemployed, with all the 'enlightened' attitudes coming out just in this comment thread.) And I think it's worth emphasizing that David Reimer was not the one who was 'confused' or 'wrong' about his gender identity-- he knew he was a boy, even when the rest of the world kept insisting otherwise. Would the djmwhatevers here want to insist that he was just 'wrong' or 'mistaken,' that whatever was wrong was completely in his head, and that his 'bits' should be kept as they were at all cost?

Was anthrax found in the PO Box? Because back when I was a bitty stamp collector, you used to be able to address envelopes to "Postmaster" asking them to be forwarded on with the town/city's postmark. I bet you can't do that any more, but could you do it in 2001?

I hope they move Dan Abrams to the 10-spot. Honestly, I'd rather watch an hour of Rachel than Countdown, so I'm delighted I'll get to see her host her own show.