Good analysis of a long-standing problem. Too bad most of it's in the letters column.

Is it any coincidence that this pattern started in the early 70s, when some Americans had begun to think for themselves on matters of race, war, economics and lifestyle, and push for change? That "a college degree becoming the new high school diploma" coincided with the catastrophic rise in college tuition? That massive layoffs of people over forty making reasonable salaries and their replacement by twenty-somethings making ten to twenty thousand dollars less coincided with the seizing of power (we know "election" isn't the right word) by the present administration?

To answer a question asked by one writer: yes, this does affect people in their fifties and sixties, some of whom, at least, worked hard to mold a world free of race, class and jingoism, a world that makes possible the election of a Barack Obama, who seems not to reallize it. Classism came roaring back with the Reagan reactionaries. So, yes, some of us do deserve better.

Glenn may have a point. When you're speaking of the aptly named Electro Robot (1140 letters to Salon in the last two months, most of them resembling the above), you're less likely to be talking about a real human being than an automated snark generator. Love to have the algorhythm for that, though. It could be put to a more noble use.

As for Parker's column, what a load. I remember her from years ago (about when that picture was taken) as a lightweight family columnist. She was awful then, too, though the bigotry was aimed more toward "preserving" the "traditional" family. Read today's piece first thing this morning. Enough to make you whoof your Cheerios.

But, seriously, after the last couple weeks, stuff like this is all they've got left. Get ready for a lot more. And the WaPo, which used to be worth reading, deserves to be answered.

for the worst letters thread I've ever seen in Salon, and that's saying something.

Post after post by Clintonistas staggering around, trying to wrench the knives out of their backs. Ad hominem after AH, as if personalities were more important than ideas, or one personality was more interesting, or fundamentally different, from another.

If this is what it's come really come to, it's pretty sad. In reality, though, it's part of my intended post on a misunderstanding of the headline. I thought the dying regimes were the Clintons and the DLC.

That explains the screaming and staggering. They're going down, and won't go without taking it all with them. A vote for McCain will do that. Then they hope to rise from the grave, having punished us all properly for ignoring them.

Shades of Christopher Lee. And spare some pity for the Obamanauts, who are too polite to pound the stake deeply enough.

but yes, the only demographic groups Clinton controls are paid DLC staffers and white women over fifty. The most intelligent comment in months (aside from John Edwards asking "Where's my jetski?") was made by the Clinton staffer who said "This was all over in March." So why does it go on?

But no, I don't wish anyone dead. Just quiet, so we can proceed with the real business, defeating the Republicans and installing a reasonably progressive government in this ailing country, without regard to race, sex, religion, gender or the rest of it. And a literate posting thread. It's always been the best part of Salon, at least since the departure of Tim Grieve, Steve Benen and Michelle Goldberg.

nothing about witches please, a very old and respected religious group, included in the blanket tolerance of the previous post. Some of my best friends, and all that. Really.

If you mean bitch, say bitch. No problem there at all.

And you did.

But it is the new black.

destroyed itself when it lost control of Congress two years into its first administration. Or at the Chicago convention of '96, which was held without a word being said about what happened there in '68. Or when it sprayed depleted uranium over eastern Europe. Or when Ron Carey pulled off an insurgent victory, tossed the Hoffas out of the Teamsters, then pulled off a successful strike against UPS. His reward was a corruption indictment from Janet Reno's Justice Department, which stripped him of his presidency and meekly returned the union to the Hoffas. Years later, well into the Bush administration, he was acquitted of all charges.

Janet Reno would be a chapter by herself. And there was, gosh, what was her name, Monica. And Marc Rich. That one that really did it for me, after years of alibiing the guy, realizing he really was a crook.

Then there's the kneecapping of two presidential campaigns. Clinton people convinced both Gore and Kerry to quit too early, but H fights on to the death, and not hers. Why is that?

As for herself, I'll leave that to Olbermann. Tone aside (love to see him and Lou Dobbs temple to temple), he was pretty accurate.

Do something constructive. Troll McCain. He's not a reasonable substitute for anyone. Bob Barr would be a better choice. And no, that's not an endorsement.

And, speaking of McCain: I know some of the Obama staffers (he's not my candidate, I went for Edwards and Dodd, but I know them) and they're about as far away from professional lobbyists as you can get. You're so blinded by anger and frustration, you can't tell your opponents apart.

I tend toward the dramatic cryptic referential.

But that's what I'm talkin about.

Thanks.