This is sort of responding to doloresflower a couple pages back, but also in general.

I've been for Clinton all along, mainly because I thought she would make a freakishly competent president and that would be a nice change. But have never been against Obama, and I've been ready to support him for quite some time, all the more now that he's likely to win the nomination. In fact, I've already written a pre-emptive email to my family telling them not to forward me articles about flag pins, Israel, anti-semitism, Wright, or any number of things that are circulating and will continue to circulate. I never thought Clinton was a perfect (or even close) candidate, but I do believe in her as a fighter, and as surprising as it may seem to some, a good person.

But it's just not in me to care passionately about people I don't know--that includes Clinton, it includes Obama, and it includes most of the letter writers here (although some of my favorites, I wish I did know).

Also, AKA, I was amused (with myself) to learn that "Politics is the art of the possible" is not actually from the musical Evita--given that there's a whole song with that line as the chorus. I would have credited it to Tim Rice :)

You seem to be taking much of the criticism against you seriously, and that's to your credit. But I'm sure you know that to many, your biggest sin is not running Salon as a 24-7 campaign ad for Obama. I've read measured posts by you that immediately collect 10-20 letters showing nothing but rage and a seemingly willful effort to misunderstand your point.

Even though it's an imaginary party, I'm still pleased to be invited. So, this is more or less the letter going out to my family:

subject: preemptive "no thanks"

Hi family,

Obama was not my 1st choice, but Obama it is. So, I am telling you here and now that I am NOT interested in receiving forwards on any of the following subjects:

--Obama secretly hates white people (he does not)

--Obama is a secret Muslim (he is not)

--Obama secretly hates Jews (he does not)

--Obama is against Israel (he is not)

--Anything about Michelle Obama (who is not running for president)

--Anything about Rev. Wright (who is not running for president; also, I don't care)

IN ADDITION, I am not interested in receiving forwards or articles that are:

--HIGH ON THE OUTRAGE METER AND TO PROVE IT, CONTAIN LOTS OF CAPITAL LETTERS AND EXPLANATION MARKS!!!!

--Written by people who have already shown themselves to be far right

These are not real subjects and do not advance real dialogue. If you're worried that by missing out on a piece of sub-par writing, I will miss out on something important, don't. I read a lot of political writing, and will be aware of every bump and scandal along the way.

I see now that I look at it again that there's not a bullet on flag pins. Probably because my family--as right-wing as some of them are--would not bother me with flag pins. Or maybe I'm giving them too much credit.

"explanation marks" is meant to be "exclamation marks," obvs. People just seem to think !!! is explanatory.

We don't know what the LW is, except a concerned child. And frankly, the concern seems reasonable.

"Is ______ good for the Jews?"

Hence the "the." You can plug anything into the blank, that's the joke.

I've been offline all day and haven't had a chance to read through all these letters, but I found myself thinking today about how much "story" there has been on Obama vs./supporting/supported by "the Jews" lately, in Salon and elsewhere. I guess that's what people are interested in. I've posted on it here, as a thing I'm worried about. But I don't like this continuing story. Because: Republicans (who are Jewish) are going to vote for McCain. Conservative-leaning independents (who are Jewish) are probably going to vote for McCain. They're going to vote for McCain with their wallets and their conservative bent. Take my family, which has me anxious about their willingness to vote for Obama. It occurred to me today (duh!) they weren't going to vote for Hillary, either (probably)! Please, some of them voted for Romney, way back when. So no, it's not "the Jews" who are running this country and this election cycle. It's just the same assholes who've been shouting for the last eight years. And some of those assholes are Jewish.

I've been reading Dan Savage for a long time, too, and he makes it pretty clear that GGG has to be, you know, consensual. I don't think he'd be pushing a survivor of sexual abuse to give it up for her husband's fantasies as long as she "gets something from it," when the LW made it pretty clear the chances of that are nil. But this doesn't make the LW the opposite of GGG--it's not like she's withholding because she's some kind of close-minded bitch. She has some pretty damn good reasons for not being into her husband's set of kinks. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with him--but there's nothing wrong with her, either. Now, I think Dan Savage would have taken a break from his usual tongue in cheek humor and laid down some love on this LW. But basically, she didn't write to Dan Savage, she wrote to Cary. In doing so, she was almost guaranteed some TLC and outside permission to find a therapist, and well, she got it. Good for her.

I think my first letter directed at you was too strong--you weren't really making a judgment on the LW. It just seems clear that there's nothing in this particular fantasy for her. And given the circumstances, I don't think the husband can just crawl off to another dom to get his needs met. The LW is not withholding for the sake of it. Anyway, blah blah blah--you don't care. I overreacted.