Way back when the Iraq war started, most folks thought the war was a good idea. Most folks bought the obvious lies that the Bush administration handed out as justification. 7 out of 10 people, as I remember; a figure that astounded me then as it does now. Although Salon readers are probably a skewed population, probably half of the letters written decrying the Bush Administration's lies were composed by people who at one time believed them.

When is a lie so transparent as to be neither newsworthy nor cause for outrage? I can see positive things in the fact that so many still had faith in the government after Vietnam, after Reagan, after a parade of scandals that go way beyond philandering. I can understand having a hard time escaping the post-9/11 haze of authority worship. But to behave as if it wasn't possible to know a lie from the truth except in hindsight, as if we ourselves by vote or approval did not give consent to what is now happening; is to shortchange our own abilities to shape the future.

Sure, they lied. But we let them do it, and it is up to us to not buy it the next time.

Wow, Cary. I never thought I would read a letter in which you would fail to recognize the humanity inherent in the participants. The sister is writing a letter about a woman who has confided in her. Who trusts her. Confiding and trusting may not be an outright request for help, but it's pretty damn near.

Why on earth is blabbering the whole story the only option? Can't the LW confide in the other sisters simply that she is concerned about the sister with the problem and let them confront her?

If the sister had a dangerous drug problem, would turning one's back be a better option than an intervention, regardless of the psychological issues at play?

This man is "not very nice" to the sister of the LW. Does this mean he fights with her or is abusive in a more profound way? The line about the previous boyfriend and the STD indicates a far more serious pathology than just an affair and a manipulative sister. Would you have the only support this woman has abandon her?

You talk about family drama as if the family part of it is optional. It seems like the LW doesn't want to tell the sister what she thinks and wants to tell everyone else instead. I'm sorry, but pushing her away doesn't seem to accomplish anything. Honesty and some compassion might.

Cheers.

Whether it matters is up to you, not them.

The point was made in an earlier letter that the opinions and threats expressed--against Sierra, against Joan Walsh, against myself and every other woman posting online--are expressed by powerless individuals. Having an address, personal information, etc., provides some power, but that information is almost always easy to get, and any person is at far more risk from their car trips to the grocery store than the most rabid stalker. These people have no real power over us, that is the point.

When Queen Boudica (pardon the late-night History Channel reference) of the British Iceni was beaten and her daughters raped by the Romans, did she crawl and whimper about never being the same? No! She beat their asses! She did not allow a momentary setback to define the limits of her power, and she made her actions matter--even if it meant her death or worse. And here we are with so much more health and opportunity, wondering what to do in the face of some words?

Well, what does one do with a violent-minded, obnoxious, angry individual? Irritate him. Not ignore him, or give in to the false notion of his power. Goad and mock him and make him feel small.

Laughter is the most powerful antidote to the nastiest vitriol. It means you are so strong you don't have to take it seriously. Slit my throat and cum down my gob? Dad, is that you? Don't tell me mom left your cage open again!

Fear of attack is not the same thing as actual attack. Many of us who have been through the latter will be happy to educate Ms. Sierra about how fear can be more crippling than injury. Injury may be inflicted upon women, but we inflict fear upon ourselves.

It was in the news when Jobs unveiled his iPhone that Greenpeace was protesting outside. The reason? Despite Apple's forward thinking design, they still lag far behind Nokia and Dell in pursuing green business policies. Dell seeks to recycle the environmentally hazardous components of their computers, while Apple just ignores the problem. While I personally have no affiliation to Greenpeace, there is certainly more to my choice as a consumer than techno-lust driven by shiny metallic lines.

Not every consumer choice is merely about function.

As a Mainer, it is an amusing assumption that Maine is blue and New Hampshire is (or was) red. The people in both states have very similar values, with very different incomes and tax policies that up until recently kept them on different sides of the political fence. But if you look at Republicans Mainers elect and re-elect (like Olympia Snowe), and the Democrats elected in NH (like John Lynch), you'll find more similarities than differences.

Cripes, we all just want some honest, hard-working politicians, and don't care whether they're called Republican, Democrat, or Spudlicktarian.

How is that news, or, in fact--any different from the rest of the country?