I identified myself as a Pats fan right in this very letters thread, so congratulations on that bit of detective work!

I would have engaged your post on the merits if there were any merits. First you tried to say that Brady and Belichick don't belong on your hallowed list because all those other guys won four Super Bowls. Except that one of your pairs was wrong, because, as I pointed out, Walsh retired after his third.

Then you went off on a long boring and unfocused rant about NFL history and your opinion of the greatest teams -- when you couldn't even get the year right.

And last, you said the Pats' dynasty was due to a rule that got changed -- do you mean the infamous "Tuck Rule"? If so, I'm afraid you're wrong again. The league examined the Tuck Rule after that season and re-affirmed it. It has not been repealed.

But go ahead and keep swinging, edwardo, you might make contact someday.

Up to now, unlike the Phins, the NE Patsies have NOT won back to back Superbowls. So they still can't enter that elite class either.

Look up Super Bowls 38 and 39, Mensa posterboy, and tell me who won those.

When did Starbucks have soul? I regarded them as soulless McCoffee trolls in the late 1990s when they opened up a branch directly across the street from the beloved independent coffee shop with the awesome pastries and to-die-for lentil soup on my campus.

I may have been one of those "Obama or McCain" voters identified in an earlier Salon article about Hillary Clinton's gender-related difficulties. No more. My respect for McCain had already been dealt serious blows by his rolling-over for Bush in 2004 and his adoption of the cheap, pernicious "cut and run" language to describe people opposed to the Iraq War. But if the guy who once described Falwell and Robertson as "agents of intolerance" is now so far gone that he will embrace a crazy fuck like John Magee, to Hell with John McCain. I'm done extending him the least bit respect. He's the Whore of Babylon in my book. Let's hope the Hagee With Seven Heads devours him sometime before Election Day.

The media double standard on this... Well, just when I thought I'd run out of anger against the congenitally lazy and corrupt Washington press corps, they go and surprise me with a new low.

I'm a Catholic and I cringe when Donohue speaks. He doesn't speak for me, that's for damn sure. But the most significant "enemy of my enemy" situation here is the political alliance between abortion-obsessed Catholics and the fundamentalist evangelical Protestants who've traditionally shit on Catholics for years (in their eyes, we're not even "Christian") but have scrabbled for Catholic votes since Karl Rove decided they should. I am more than ready for Catholicism to end its alliance with McJesus. I'm tired of being connected to the Southern Hate Brigades.

Glenn didn't say anything about Meghan McCain anywhere. He hasn't even said anything negative about the McCain campaign here. His criticism has always been about the press. Media accountability and coziness with the figures they are supposed to cover is one of the central issues of Glenn's blog. Now that you've acknowledged that there is something wrong with the behavior of the press in this case, and since Glenn hasn't said anything critical about the McCains, perhaps you could abandon your outrage over Glenn's sarcastic response to your first post, which smacks of thick-wittedness and an inability to comprehend what you read. Frankly, he was gentler on you than you deserve.

Glenn's updated his post to clarify that he's not criticizing Meghan McCain or even the McCain campaign for this junket. Frankly, KathyBird, most people were able to figure this out on their own. I can see why Glenn's sarcasm hurt you. You must be subject to a lot of sarcasm in your daily life.

I see your point, but I think it misses something. Yes, Glenn doesn't explicitly say anything about McCain's daughter. But he didn't say anything about the press either. So, by your logic, he wasn't criticizing anyone, I guess?

Hrm. I think quoting "The guys from the Politico brought my mom flowers" as the title of this piece ought to indicate what Glenn's message may have been here. Might have provided some clue as to what Glenn found objectionable in the story. Unless you, the savvy observer of all sorts of political chicanery, will claim that bringing flowers for a candidate's wife is standard media behavior?

Time to stop being willfully obtuse, Kathy. At least I hope it's willful.

"You guys are a bunch of group-thinking assholes and I'm going to take my ball and go home."

Don't let the liberal groupthinking door hit you in your provably smart, working ass on the way out, KathyBird.

P.S. On the internets, people are mean to each other. Advise that you reconcile yourself with this sad fact of life.

And someone commented to Kathy that people are just mean on the internets, etc. Well, so what? I then become mean because others are?

I would suggest she come to terms with being exposed to sarcasm on the Internet instead of whining about the very mild dose of sarcasm she received from Glenn. I wouldn't have jumped on her except for her prissy, oversensitive attitude in her first response to Glenn. And she tried to climb up on a cross by saying that respect flowed only one way in this thread -- whatever. Implying that people have personality disorders, etc shows that respect was flowing in no direction when she was involved. No, I'm not claiming any moral high ground. I'm just not buying that she has it.