The fact that Ms Kaplan wrote a two page essay on the subject of Michelle Obama's posterior is not the most disturbing part of this whole affair. Kaplan, as evidenced by other things she has written, is apparently weirdly fascinated by the female African-American ass, so it is not surprising that she would submit 1000 words that read as if they were hastily scrawled in a loose-leaf notebook with a dull pencil.

Unfortunately, Joan Walsh made not one, but two astonishingly bad editorial decisions. Not only did she decide to run a two-page paean to Ms Obama's rear end, which could perhaps have been dismissed as a hopelessly incompetent attempt to be amusingly light-hearted. But she then decided to run it as the lead story on the front page that day. Having considered the issues of a serious economic crisis, the future of our country under a new president, bickering among liberals over the developing direction of the Obama presidency, etc., Joan Walsh decided that the most important article submitted to Salon that morning was this unsettling glimpse into the stranger parts of Ms Kaplan's psyche.

It was these decisions, I believe, that led to the firestorm of disapproval in this letters section and the well-deserved mockery of Salon which is taking place in the conservative parts of the blogosphere.

The article itself is more strange than anything, a slightly disturbing look at one African-American's self-image issues. Ms Walsh's choice to give it such prominence elevates it to the level of offensiveness and, yes, racism. Since I am certain that Ms Walsh is not racist, I am at a loss to explain this, except perhaps by uncharacteristic incompetence.

Making this the first thing readers saw that morning also trivializes Salon as a whole. Today, do you think that people formerly unfamliar with Salon think of it as the home of insightful commentary by Glenn Greenwald and Juan Cole, or as the site that had the article about Michelle Obama's ass?

Thanks, fromPhilly, for pointing us to statements from other African-Americans who are as appalled by this travesty as the rest of us. That goes a long way toward refuting the apologists here who have taken the bizarre position that Kaplan's ass fetish is some sort of feminist race-positive statement.

I know that argument by analogy has already been done nearly to death here but I wonder what the reaction would have been in 1991 to a statement by a young African-American man that he felt vindicated by the appointment of a big-lipped black man to the Supreme Court.

I've lived most of my life in Texas and have traveled through much of the south, and I regret that I must say that there is craziness here that outsiders cannot begin to imagine.

I think Mr. Lind misses a key point when citing statistics about other regions' strange opinions, and that is what drives those opinions. When Obama became president, there ensued a nationwide shortage of firearms and ammo. In the north, people were crowding gun stores in fear that Obama was going to outlaw private possession of firearms; in the south, whites were preparing to defend themselves against Obama's secret Muslim plot to force Christians into concentration camps. Another example: as Mr. Lind notes, many non-white non-southerners hold conservative positions on issues like abortion, gay rights, and immigration. But it is in the south that you will hear whites say in all seriousenss that liberal positions in these matters are symptomatic of a conscious conspiracy to destroy America, a conspiracy that must be met with loud and, if "necessary," violent opposition.

It would be useful in this context see poll numbers, not on issues about which there is reasonable disagreement, but on beliefs that are outside the realm of rational thought. Besides the type of southern white that I encounter every day, how many people think that states have a right to secede from the union, or that the "Democrat party" is a front for a Jewish-communist one-world government conspiracy, or that Obama is the AntiChrist. These are all ideas that are routinely and seriously discussed among southern whites.

Compared to people I encounter every week at the nearby feed store, Glenn Beck is the voice of reason.

I've seen many complaints about the attention being given to Mr. Kostric, but I think that the old adage about there being no such thing as bad publicity does not apply here. It is important that people like this be exposed as much as possible. Last week, that small minority of us who pay attention to such things learned that the wingnuts were tweeting each other to come armed to town hall meetings. With this story, the whole nation will learn that these folks are armed and dangerous. What's needed is actually more attention paid to these people. It's not enough to know that some guy showed up with a 9mm handgun. The media must now follow through by connecting this individual to the broader movement of anti-American insurgent wannabes with whom he associates.Ms Walsh has taken a valuable first step in doing that.