I do applaud the LW for her honesty, but I can tell her from experience that her concerns are more than a bit shallow...the fact is that if she is looking for a LTR, she should understand that sexual interest comes and goes, but the feelings she needs to sustain the relationship are exactly what she describes experiencing with this man...if she really wants to pursue this guy, she should help him explore where his weight issues come from--there may be a pathology involved that she can help him resolve. There is no question that our culture has produced people with weight problems, but there are ways to address them--working on this together will probably bring this couple closer, if he is open to this inquiry. She should approach this is a health problem, not as an aesthetic problem...eventually I think she will see it as such if she begins to really care about him...

So much reporting has focused on the plight of the Israelis, the bind they are in, and how they need to protect themselves by moving into Lebanon. This article, from the heart of Beirut, by a reporter who is becoming enamored of the city, further supports the Israeli response...do the Lebanese need rescuing from themselves (and, of course, Syria)? How pathetic George Bush, and by extension, all of us in the US, must look to both the Israelis and the Lebanese...unable to tune in to the potentiality of a massacre, starting in Lebanon and spreading to Iran and beyond...we need a regime change of our own...2008 seems like a long way off...

Is Gonzales seriously citing the definition of "improper reason" suggested in a Slate article? Are we to believe he combed the liberal online press for ideas about what he should say at this auspicious moment?

What next? Bush quoting The New Republic's definition of "terrorism"? Or Cheney referring to the new online version of Pravda for the most succinct desciption of "weapons of mass destruction" to justify pushing W to fire on Iran?

Although several people have raised the issue of this happening in front of kids, I don't think anyone has emphasized this enough. Mothers? Help me out here.

At 49 years old, travel widely, and have never run across two women going at it in a public bathroom. But my 13 year-old son has observed this twice, both times before he was a teenager. He found it very disturbing. Not because it was gay sex, but because it was sex at all. In front of him.

That's what makes Craig's actions illegal and reprehensible. We mothers of boys take our sons into the women's bathroom long after they want us to. When they get too big, we cringe every time we send them into the men's room alone.

This was the MINNEAPOLIS AIRPORT for God's sakes. Not a bar, club or bathhouse.

I support the right of gay men and women to have happy, fulfilled romantic lives like everyone else.

But nobody--gay or straight---should be irresponsibly messing with my kid's head....

I once met you, Walter, so I feel comfortable addressing you informally...

You've spent a lot of time in New Hampshire, so, by now, you should understand that New Hampshirites don't give a damn about the nuances of strategy in politics--they just want to be FIRST! It's their God-given right!

Once I was an Iowan, who believed that political choice could be made by gathering with fellow party members to cheerfully discuss the pros and cons of various candidates. We thought we were first because we were so rational, fair and measured.

Now I live in New Hampshire and I understand my job is to try to trip up candidates into telling us all how they really feel. We're first because we're forthright and not easily impressed.

No way we're going to ignore Michigan's primary. Especially if a major candidate is on their ballot. December it is. We have to be FIRST! Winter is a long time in New Hampshire. Not much difference between December and January...

Can't you answer at least some of them? I confess I'm working on the dog-hair one myself. I'm thinking the hair can be found on every other suitcase in the hold.

did they address that big whopper about baggage covered with unprovenanced doghair told by a certain pilot/internet columnist a few months ago?

I am a New Hampshire Democrat, and I went into the debate leaning towards Obama. Edward has always seemed too slick to me. I feel Hillary may be electable, but would rule as a very divisive figure, and that's a problem for me. Richardson, honestly, is an embarrassment. Although he may have been a decent civil servant governor for all I know, extemporaneously he is a nightmare--not Presidential material at all.

I guess I was disappointed. Although Obama gives great speeches, he debates poorly and does not seem to have much to say for himself other than he wants to "unite" everyone.

I was angry at Hillary's anger. It could have been a powerful moment if it had been justified. But to compare her "record" to anyone else's on the stage was completely disingenuous. She wasn't elected to any office before this first term in the Senate; she picked and chosen her issues--hasn't even had to APPLY and be hired for a job in many many years. She is the one who needs a "reality check."

Edwards (who is, indeed, slick) has, like Obama, lived a life that reflects what he believes. He actually reminded me a bit of Tony Blair last night.

I don't have a clue who I'm voting for on Tuesday.

Salon readers have to put their rebates toward credit card debt because we put $1300 per cat on that plastic.