After noting that the author misrepresented Ann Coulter's comments about Edwards in the first paragraph, I quickly scanned the rest of the article and determined it wasnt worth reading closely due to its illogical (aka liberal) bent. The only interesting news is that Mrs Edwards is attacking Hillary. Boy, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Military experience does not necessarily qualilfy someone on combat matters (Im retired military). Conversly, a lack of military experience should not necessary dis-qualify someone on commenting on military affairs. Rather, the prerequiste for discussing/commenting on/recommending military matters is a dose of common sense and decency, and the ability to differentiate between good and bad.

This requirement obviously disqualifies most folks on the democratic side and endorses folks (for the most part) on the right.

Witness Ronald Reagan (a case for the right) and, and on the other side of the fence, a recent democratic presidential candidate. These two examples epitimize the divide.

In that vein, both Rudy and Mitt qualify and (god help us) no one on the democratic side even comes close. Wow, are we in trouble.

Gee, I would bet that all the Republican candidates have faults and issues; however, in spite of their problems, they far outshine the Democrats. Come on, be intellectually honest (if you can) - Hillary, Obama, Edwards(???), Kucinich (????). As a society, we would be better off with any of the Republican candidates (baggage and all).

Well, I kinda wish they hadnt wasted time and money on developing smart bombs and other precision weapons. It looks like we should scrap them all and just to back to the old fashion way of waging war. The days were 100,000 to 500,000 are killed in a single day (boy, swords and spears can be effective) and whole cities and towns were wiped out. Then you really would have something to complain about. The mistake we made was trying to civilize warfare.

I enjoyed the article, however, the interesting stuff was in some of the 114 letters in response. All I can say is that the average letter is truly enlightening - how far we have fallen. Boy, is this country in trouble, liberalism is truely a mental disorder. I must say that my daily dose of Salon provides a lot of insight into the twisted/perverted logic (thinking?) of the left.

Reading the letters in Salon is almost as good as listening to Air America. Thanks.

No need to read the column. The picture says it all. You people have to be kidding. As bad as Hillary is (evil, corrupt, lying, immoral, and devious), she is better than Obama. Im beginning to think that democracy is a foolish idea - it would be ok if only intelligent people could vote, but the interest in the Democratic candidates proves otherwise.

You folks are really interesting. Its almost comical how afraid you are of Sarah Palin. Yet you dont fear, (or are too ignorant to fear, and/or uninformed, and/or demented, and/or substance abused or just mentally twisted) to fear a quite more dangerous person. Im not a McCain or Palin fan, but compared to the other choice,they are great.

Talk about bad. Besides being stupid, this article is racist, poorly written and just,well, come on, it's just dumb. However, unfortunately, it's kinda typical of the stuff in Salon.

Thank god for common sense - that is, the Republicans. No one, with any intelligence or work ethic, would like the unions. Hence, the liberal love fest for the unions. Enough said.

time will tell.

I had to force myself to finsih reading this poorly written sob story - I actually skipped the last two paragraphs (too painful to finish). I dont feel sorry for her; I feel sorry for the guy who married her.

Gee, I hope he gets smart,dumps her,and moves back to the beach.

If I have a sword - you lose.

Who (in their right minds) really cares about this?

Shouldnt this article be entitled, "Why did we elect a Jerk." I quick review indicated that McCain, who is kinda of a jerk, is right on regarding his efforts. Anyone with any intellectual honesty (that is brains) can see how twisted this new administration has become - in record time.

Go get them Johhny.

I think the subject line says it all.

Who cares if Glenn Beck's poetry sucks. It does. However, he is right on regarding social, political, economic, and, in general, on matters that require a little thinking and common sense (that requirement is way beyond the typical Salon reader's ability). Amazing how you folks dont have the intellectual honesty to address/recognize the important matters he has addressed, but rather dwell on his crappy poetry.

In the meantime we have someone in charge who cant think (has to default to his tele prompter), cant reason, cant lead, and cant manage. However, Im sure his poetry is wonderful, and Im surprised there hasnt been an article yet about it.

Bottom line, you folks, as ususal, have missed the point.

While I dont always agree with what he says, at least he makes sense some of the time. So compared to Obama, Frank (good lord), Pelosi (yikes) and the rest of the gang on the left, he is great. At least he has that one ability that seems to evade the liberal mindset - the ability to think (most of the time logically) and communicate (and without a telepromter too).

Ok, this is short. The writer is joking, right (April fools was several days ago - this article should have been published then).

Obviously, the writer (one or a combination of the following):

1. )has never been to France/Europe;

2.) has never read and/or understood history/economics;

3.) is intellectually bankrupt;

4.) is the product of the US educational system (probably went to a school in the northeast).