Bill E Pilgrim

Paglia gets linked by Drudge? That explains it then. I knew there was no way she was that big a draw on her own. I thought perhaps Walsh was a personal friend or owed her something. Salon probably can't bring itself to lose the clicks, despite the lack of credibility and the poor writing that she brings.

Yes, and Limbaugh also often points to her when as proof that "even liberals" agree with him, secretly. That and Drudge explains a lot of the really extreme right wingers in Salon these days, but she's been followed, and defended, here for many years, long before Drudge started linking to her.

The first time I read her in a local alternative weekly in the 90s I thought she seemed like the most vapid columnist I'd ever seen, or, as Molly Ivins called her in a review of her just around that time, "a twit". To my complete amazement, she was then presented at Salon, which I had thought was going to be a more or less progressive zine, or at least an intelligent one.

That's why I've never really been expecting much from Salon. It's fun to read, but no one should really take it seriously.

The fact you make a statement like that at Salon where Glenn Greenwald is today hammering (justifiably so) President Obama in the lead story makes your position all the more laughable.

Are you really claiming that the hyperventilating about the "bow" heard on Fox News is remotely similar to the entirely reasonable and useful adult criticism of President Obama by Glenn Greenwald?

Persuade me that you're not. If not. I'm entirely open to the idea that you may mean something else.

God I hope so.

Exactly. Why are we wasting time on any of this when we can debate the hot issues of the day ... like whether Obama's new dog is a purebred or rescue pooch?

And more important, what was his posture when he greeted the dog? Does anyone have a photo? Do we owe allegiance now to an entire species?

Let me just go on the record now as saying that I for one welcome our canine overlords.

Note to others here: Things are given the response they merit.

The bogus claim that "the left can't stand any criticism of Barack Obama" is disproved easily by the support shown for Greenwald's work here, for one. It's just that it's serious, actual criticism going on in his case. No less harsh, just less silly.

Nice try. This one is simply ridiculous.

Well, okay I think I waded through that, although your using the passive voice so much made it a little hard to tell what was your opinion and what wasn't.

I think your answer was yes? That this issue is as important to discuss, as consequential, as meritorious of deep concern as are the topics that Glenn Greenwald raises?

The notion that Barack Obama actually bowed, and moreover in a politically-meaningful way that indicated something about a shift in our policy towards the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and that this is something that is both undeniable and worthy of our great concern, whether espoused by ranting extremists like Glenn Beck or sober posters at a Salon comments section?

I think it's silly. I can't be more direct than that, sorry. Any equation of this nonsense with the concerns that Greenwald raises is absurd, no matter how oblique.

This is a woman who still lends credibility to the birth-certificate lunatics, fergawdssakes!

Perfectly stated.

For me, it was her claim that Rahm Emanuel and the White House were trying to "silence" Rush Limbaugh.

Silence him! They were actually being accused by the right wingers of gleefully putting him front and center, calling him the "leader" of the GOP. The last thing on God's green earth that they wanted was for him to be silenced.

Spouting right wing talking points is one thing. Showing that you don't even understand the controversy you're trying to parrot is just pathetic.

and the more recent quote from John McCain, I couldn't help thinking how far we've fallen.

Now the right wingers think that Salon should devote more time to sensationalizing tragic crime stories.

I think it's time for me to turn this site off again.

If you drop Paglia now, and Drudge stops linking to you, you might drain off some of them, though it may take months or even years. For now, it's just getting worse.

can't deny that.

All I see are vague, empty slogans and lizard-brain anger. why don't they spell it out for us in a pamphlet of some sort...

This host on Fox (click my signature) described exactly what it's about, it was perfectly clear. See, it's a protest by people who have "seen their 401ks cut in half!" and are therefore protesting universal health care. Presumably because all the money we spend on universal health care is where their stock market money went.

They're also protesting having their taxes "hiked to the heavens" because despite the fact that almost to a person, they have just received significant tax cuts under Barack Obama, they know in their hearts that they're about to make 250,000 to 500,000 per year and upwards, just like Joe the Plumber, thus will be taxed as much as people like that were taxed eight years ago, driving them to the poorhouse like the other millionaires.

What could be more clear? Once your basic critical thinking skills have hiked to the heavens, anything you hear can be true if you want it bad enough.