The irony of the later Farah is that in her early celebrity, she represented a lighthearted, upbeat sexual image. And make no mistake: in the days of her glory, she wasn't an actress, she wasn't a comedienne. She was a sex symbol. She was, indeed, the sex symbol. As such she seemed to simply dismiss the tough-as-nails, sarcastic, gritty angst ridden qualities of the early 70s, when sex was synonymous with you-pays-your-money-you-takes-your-chances porn, and brough back something of the 1960's healthy-optimistic approach to sex, yet without coming across as a hippy.

I don't agree that she was glamorous. Her style was too earthy for that. Even that mop hair looked so natural, with its tossled, casual quality, though obviously it is not nature that creates such curls.

I don't agree that she was much of an actres, either. She wasn't bad at all. She developed her niche in later years, though I too always got the uncomfortable feeling she was playing herself.

But more than many, many celebrities she had that special magnetism. that star quality that makes you want to look at and know someone, which is very different from giving a great performance, or even being traditionally beautiful, for that matter. She wasn't Streep. She wasn't Monrone. She seemed to create the era she defined: the late 70's easy-going permissiveness. She was one-of-a-kind. Simply put, she was Farah.

I guess Clark-Flory thinks she's Salon's Susie Bright. She's closer to Helen Gurley Brown.

"Let's rehash Battlestar Galactica's premise and toss in a commentary on reality shows, too. Oh, and lets have a holodeck catastrophe like every second episode of every Star Trek spin-off series!" I can understand why the first two would appeal to Havrilesky, who's more than a little obsessed with both. But, man, this sounds like a stinker. The plot is way too convoluted by half and it seems like a lot of rehashed ideas tossed together rather than a coherent concept with ideas to ponder.

I'm not saying that movies/books/shows shouldn't be influened by past concepts. I'm not saying you can't take previously used ideas and fly with them in a fresh direction (that's largely the history of science fiction). But when you recreate essentially the exact plot premise of your previous series, and all the details that make it different are just odd ends lifted from other works (I sense the influence of Dark Star and Silent Running and obviously Alien as well), I distinctly hear a barrel's bottom being scraped.

I remember Glenn Greenwald writing an article on that (not related to gay issues, but hot button topics in general) when Obama first got into office. And I've been wondering if this was one of those cases, too.

A full half of the article is a summary of another woman's anti-father rant. What, you couldn't find enough good to say about your dad to fill a whole column? He must be proud.

Wrong. He's a one schtick pony. He seemed like a talented actor back when he first appeared on Arrested Development. But he has one character, one emotion, one line reading. And he milks it in movie after movie. Year One shows that he's not even trying to develop.

To me there are two issues that are at the forefront of this debate: time and urgancy.

Obama has been in office a very short amount of time. If within the first couple of years in office, he hasn't taken greater steps, I will agree with the charges against him here. But I will give him a couple of years to do something.

The other issue is that he immediately inherited a crumbling economy and a nasty international situation. Those things must come first. They are simply more important to the county. They are more important to our survival as gay men and women than the issue of gay marriage. Most Obama's time should be focussed on Kim Jong-il and the issue of Korean nuclear weapons.

How the average gay can feel like a second class citizen when his or her right to a job, home in any location, education, or legal ability to control hospitial visitiation and ownership of property, are all legally protected is beyond me. When was a bar last raided? When have dating sites been used as shake-downs or published in print so that companies can fire those named? Who in a long term relationship isn't treated as a married couple by all who know them? You can arrange your legal issues right now so that any benefit a married couple recieves, you will recieve, too.

I'm completely in favor of gay marriage, but it simply isn't the most important issue facing America. I can understan why it isn't the first crisis the president chooses to resolve.

It's like arguing with a drunk in a bar.

You nailed it.

You seem unreasonably shocked by what is a fairly typical O'Reilly encounter. Did you never see the show before? Do you not know anyone who has appeared as his guest?

Stop the snarky pieces from other Salon writers, which suggest you can't fight your own battles (when clearly you can). And stop licking your wounds in public. You're better than that. You're tougher than that.

Yes, he's a jerk. Yes, the format is rigged. Let it go.